The Other McCain

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

In The Mailbox: 01.03.17

Posted on | January 3, 2017 | 2 Comments

— compiled by Wombat-socho


OVER THE TRANSOM
BattleSwarm: Interview With James Quintero On The Texas Municipal Pension Debt Crisis
EBL: Is Me-Again Kelly Off To NBC?
Michelle Malkin: The Rot Is Deep – The Corrupt EB-5 Immigration Racket You’re Not Hearing About
Twitchy: “I’m So Tired Of Islam Being Coddled” – Jenna Jameson Unleashes Twitter Hell On “Triggered Snowflakes”
Louder With Crowder: Tucker Carlson Schools Smug College Student Threatening Violence Because of Trump


RIPPED FROM THE HEADLINES
Adam Piggott: Fan Boys
American Power: USC Beats Penn State In Rose Bowl
American Thinker: The Lame Duck Restraint Act
Animal Magnetism: Animal’s Daily News
Da Tech Guy: Eight Years Later, The NYT Is Still Looking For Instapundit Readers
Don Surber: President Trump Gets Ford To Make A U-Turn In Mexico
Dustbury: Download A Thin Mint
Jammie Wearing Fools: Fake News Update – No Russian Involvement With Vermont Utility
Joe For America: Netanyahu’s UN Revenge – America’s Response Is Inevitable
Power Line: Watch The New Yorker Crash And Burn
Shark Tank: Trump Wants To Repeal A Lot Of Obamacare On Day 1
Shot In The Dark: Layers And Layers Of Gatekeepers, Part MMMLXVII
STUMP: Setting The Stage For 2017 – Looking At Social Security
The Geller Report: Exclusive AFDI Video – Columbia University Students Support Female Genital Mutilation, Want Planned Parenthood To Fund It
The Jawa Report: Remember When Assad Allowed Al-Qaeda Passage And Lived To Regret It?
The Political Hat: North Carolina And Democracy
This Ain’t Hell: Tuesday Morning Feelgood Stories
Weasel Zippers: Poll Says 52% Of Dems Believe Russia Tampered With Vote Totals To Elect Trump, also, Over 1500 Refugees Diagnosed With Active TB Since 2012, Three Times Number Previously Reported
Mark Steyn: A Judicial Assault On The First Amendment


Today’s Digital Deals
Shop Amazon Warehouse Deals – Deep Discounts on Open-box and Used Kitchen Gadgets

Category: Linkagery

‘Madness Takes Its Toll’

Posted on | January 3, 2017 | 1 Comment

 

The Rocky Horror Campus Feminism Show:

A students’ union is discouraging its members from using the pronouns ‘he’ and ‘she’, to avoid assumptions being made as to how people identify.
Sussex University students’ union has released a gender inclusive language policy, which applies to all its meetings, radio broadcasts, communications, societies and elections.
The policy states that preferred pronouns should be stated at the beginning of every meeting, regardless of whether they have been stated at previous meetings, and that gender neutral language should be used when the pronoun is not known.
The policy continues: ‘In situations where introductions are not appropriate or where an individual has not directly stated their pronouns, gender-neutral language should be used to refer to them, and no assumptions should be made based on presentation or appearance.

(Via Memeorandum.) Let’s do the Time Warp again.

 

 

Category: Education, Sex Trouble

Tranny ‘Feminist’ @RileyJayDennis Is Here to Educate You About Science

Posted on | January 2, 2017 | 3 Comments

 

Justin Dennis, a/k/a Riley J. Dennis, is a transgender activist who describes himself/“herself” as an “intersectional feminist” who is “also super queer (transfeminine lesbian to be specific).” Justin/Riley become notorious in November after he/“she” declared it is “discriminatory” for anyone not to want to date him/“her.” Being normal is now a hate crime, according to the Cult of Social Justice to which Justin/Riley belongs.

“Riley J. Dennis is a polyamorous, atheist, gender non-binary transwoman . . . educating people on the nuances of gender, sexuality, and intersectional feminism.”
— Everyday Feminism

See? You’re ignorant about “nuances of gender,” which is why you need “educating” by “a polyamorous, atheist, gender non-binary transwoman.”

“Hillary is our only option to prevent a Trump presidency. That’s the only reason I really needed.”
— Justin “Riley J.” Dennis, Oct. 30, 2016

Did I mention he/“she” is a Democrat? Because, of course he/“she” is. If you want your kids to be polyamorous gender non-binary atheist intersectional feminists like Riley J. Dennis, vote Democrat.

Getting the endorsement of Justin/Riley didn’t help Hillary Clinton with blue-collar voters in Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin, but this doesn’t mean the election has caused Justin/Riley to reconsider his/“her” political ideology. In fact, he/“she” just released a new video explaining why there is no need to debate Trump supporters because Trump supporters are Nazis, and “not worthy of being debated”:

“And I know we’re always talking about how divided we’ve become as a country and how partisan, but I don’t think the answer is reaching across the aisle and shaking hands with a Nazi, because that’s exactly what this new administration is being filled with. Trump’s cabinet is already full of white nationalists. These are people who are openly misogynistic and anti-Semitic . . . The ‘alt-right’ people he surrounds himself with are modern-day neo-Nazis. . . . Because people tweet me or comment on my videos or something saying, ‘Ah, you won’t debate this idea. It’s because you’re afraid you’re gonna lose.’ . . . That’s not a logical conclusion to come to when someone doesn’t want to debate you. There’s like a million-and-a-half reasons someone might not want to debate you, but one of those might be, you just don’t have a valid viewpoint and you’re not worthy of being debated.”

 

See? If you disagree with Justin/Riley, that means “you just don’t have a valid viewpoint,” which means he/“she” doesn’t have to debate you.

You may wonder what makes Justin/Riley an expert qualified to determine what is or is not a “valid viewpoint.” Well, in addition to being a super queer transfeminine lesbian as well as a polyamorous, atheist, gender non-binary transwoman, Justin/Riley is also a recent graduate of Whittier College, where the annual tuition is $44,574, plus $12,902 room and board. Because your parents didn’t spend $57,476 a year to send you to a private liberal arts college, you obviously are too stupid to understand what words like “valid” and “viewpoint” mean.

Even though I didn’t attend prestigious Whittier College, I did ace Principles of Logic at Jacksonville (Ala.) State University, and I understand what a false analogy looks like, and I also know a straw man fallacy when I see one, so let’s quote some more Riley J. Dennis, OK?

“There are people living today, in 2016, who honestly believe that the Earth is flat. Now the thing is, those people are allowed to have that opinion. . . . But that doesn’t mean that that opinion is valid or that it should be part of our modern discourse. . . .”

(Can you guess where Justin/Riley is going with this?)

“Because I think we can all accept . . . that the Earth is not flat, the Earth is round. We live in a solar system, we orbit around the sun. And these are just basic facts that we have to accept because we know them to be true there’s a lot of scientific evidence. . . .”

(In addition to being a straw man — because no flat-earthers are actually arguing with Justin/Riley — he/“she” is also setting up a standard trick we can call the Progress Fallacy: “Here is this provably wrong idea that people held in the past, and therefore, all ideas from the past can be disregarded as invalid.” Except, of course, that the scientific method itself is based on very old ideas, dating to ancient Greece. Now, back to Justin/Riley and “modern discourse.”)

“Let’s take climate change, for example. There is a ton of scientific evidence for climate change, and yet there are still people who deny it, and we’re supposed to treat them like they have a valid argument, but they don’t, because the science is in and we know that climate change is happening. . . .”

(Except, of course, that the actual argument is about anthropogenic global warming [AGW], and it has been shown that the proponents of this claim have falsified “evidence” and disregarded alternative explanations for the observable changes in global temperatures. AGW proponents have engaged in fear-mongering and enlisted government authority to gain funding for themselves and to deny funding for their scientific critics. But please, Justin/Riley, continue to educate us.)

“Compromise is not always a good thing. One one side, we have people saying that LGBT-plus people deserve respect, should be treated equally under the law, and should be protected from discrimination. And on the other side, we have people saying that LGBT-plus should be denied their basic human rights and not be treated equally under the law.”

Here we arrive at the destination — the conclusion, the payoff — of Justin/Riley’s long and winding road of bad analogies. I’ve omitted, for the sake of brevity, the anti-vaccine analogy that Justin/Riley threw in as an example of invalid viewpoints that are not worthy to debate. You see the apples-and-oranges problem with going from (a) flat-Earth kooks, to (b) global warming, to (c) people who refuse to vaccinate their children, to (d) questions of law and policy regarding sexual behavior.

The preamble in Justin/Riley’s argument was a set-up for accusing conservatives of denying “basic human rights” to gay people. But what do these phrases mean? What does it mean, for example, to say that certain people, self-defined categorically by their sexual behavior or preferences, “deserve respect”? What does it mean to be “treated equally under the law”? What counts as “discrimination”? How is this offense defined, who is authorized to determine whether “discrimination” has occurred, and how shall this policy be enforced? These are not moot speculations, of course, because we know how advocates of soi-disant “basic human rights” operate — they file lawsuits, accusing people of illegal “discrimination,” in order to force people to do things they don’t want to do, e.g., employ “genderqueer” elementary school teachers:

A “transmasculine” teacher at an Oregon elementary school has been awarded $60,000 by her school district as compensation for harassment she claims to have suffered on the job, including being referred to by the wrong pronoun.
According to The Oregonian, Leo Soell was born a woman, but now prefers to identify as “transmasculine” and “genderqueer,” meaning she does not consider herself to be male or female . . .
The school conducted an internal investigation after Soell complained, but found no proof of harassment.
Eventually, Soell was able to cut a deal with the school to have her referred to by her preferred pronoun, “they,” but Soell said the harassment didn’t stop, so she finally hired an attorney and prepared to file an official complaint.
Oregon is a very friendly state for individuals who claim they have suffered discrimination based on gender identity. The state’s labor commissioner, Brad Avakian, forced a bakery to pay $135,000 to a lesbian couple they wouldn’t bake a cake for, and he has also compelled a bar owner to pay a whopping $400,000 to a group of transgender customers he tried to ban from his bar.
Eager to avoid meeting a similar fate, district officials agreed to pay Soell $60,000 in compensation for her emotional distress, and they also agreed to adopt a whole battery of new policies to make the district more transgender-friendly.

Now, ask yourself this: If the school officials had suspected that Brina Soell was a transmasculine genderqueer when she applied for the job, would they have hired her? But having once hired Brina, were school officials then obligated to play along with her gender-identity game when she changed her name to “Leo,” got her breasts amputated, and demanded to be referred to with the pronoun “they”?

We may be ignorant about “nuances of gender,” but we are not naïve as to how claims of “discrimination” operate in the real world. When people start blabbering about “basic human rights” and claiming they’re denied “equal treatment under the law,” what they’re really saying is, “Hand me that whip, so I can boss you around and make you do what I say.”

Declaring yourself a Victim of Social Injustice can be a pretty lucrative racket, if you can get a sharp lawyer and a friendly judge. Calling yourself a super queer transfeminine lesbian and a polyamorous, atheist, gender non-binary transwoman — well, Justin/Riley is a federal lawsuit just waiting to happen, isn’t he/“she”? For some reason, however, I’ve got a hunch that Preisdent Trump and Attorney General Jeff Sessions aren’t going to make the “basic human rights” of gender non-binary queer trans feminists a top priority at the Justice Department.

Anyway, Riley J. Dennis wants to give you some sex advice:

And some more sex advice:

And here, have some more sex advice:

Remember: Riley J. Dennis went to prestigious Whittier College and is an expert. You are ignorant and don’t know anything about sex, which is why he/“she” is educating people on the nuances of gender and sexuality. If you disagree with him/“her,” that’s because “you just don’t have a valid viewpoint and you’re not worthy of being debated.”

Riley J. Dennis has dedicated his/“her” life to insulting people — you’re ignorant if you disagree with him/“her” — and yet he/“she” is shocked to discover that people resent being lectured so insultingly.



 

Category: Gays, Sex Trouble

In The Mailbox: 01.02.17

Posted on | January 2, 2017 | 1 Comment

— compiled by Wombat-socho


OVER THE TRANSOM
BattleSwarm: LinkSwarm For December 30
EBL: Ace And Ricochet Have An Open Letter To #NeverTrumper Egg McMuffinEvan McMullin
Twitchy: Garry Kasparov Calls 2017 UN Human Rights Council Roster “Another Sick Joke”
Louder With Crowder: EPA To Fine Alaskans For Burning Wood To Stay Warm?


RIPPED FROM THE HEADLINES
Adam Piggott: Podcast #32 – The Hotel Episode
American Power: Donald Trump – “No Computer Is Safe”
American Thinker: Obama, A Political Corpse
Animal Magnetism: Goodbye, Blue Monday 2017
Da Tech Guy: John Ruberry – Actually, 2016 Was A Pretty Good Year
Don Surber: Reporter Loses It Over President Trump, also, The Year National Review Committed Suicide
Dustbury: Strange Search Engine Queries, also, Worst Titles Of 2016
Fred On Everything: The Sisterhood And A Profound Weariness – Unbiased Analysis
Joe For America: Federal Court Has Devastating New Surprise For Hillary
JustOneMinute: Squashing A Free Press – Thanks, Obama!
Power Line: Evidence For Russian Involvement In DNC Hack Is Nonexistent, also, Has Liberalism Ruined College Football Bowl Season?
Shark Tank: Trump’s New Year’s Eve Tweet Targets His “Enemies”
Shot In The Dark: The Best Threat Money Can Fabricate
STUMP: Around The Pension Blogosphere
The Geller Report: CHAOS IN GERMANY – Muslim Migrant Sex Attacks, Explosives Thrown At Police During NYE Events
The Jawa Report: Death To 2016!
The Political Hat: Happy New Year!
This Ain’t Hell: Fake News In The New Year, also, Two VA Secretary Picks Bail On Trump
Weasel Zippers: Congressional Black Caucus Plotting Resistance To Trump’s Presidency, also, Most Circulated Paper In Turkey Claims “America Top Suspect In Nightclub Terror Attack”
Megan McArdle: Hacking Democratic Rules Isn’t Good Government
Mark Steyn: A Glorious Rain


Today’s Digital Deals

Category: Linkagery

Who Democrats Really Are: @joshtpm Displays His, Uh, Feminist Theory

Posted on | January 2, 2017 | 1 Comment

Friday night, while endeavoring to make another attack on Donald Trump, the editor of the left-wing blog Talking Points Memo made a minor mistake. Josh Marshall (@joshtpm on Twitter) evidently cut and pasted the wrong URL into a tweet, so that his message included a link to a lesbian porn scene involving “Angela & Strawberry.”

 

Absent any feasible explanation from Marshall, everyone immediately reached the obvious conclusion: While running his anti-Trump rants on his Twitter feed, this eminent progressive pundit was also simultaneously scrolling through the PornHub site on another PC window.

Talking Points Memo Chief
Tweets Out Hardcore Porn by Accident
While Trying to Attack Trump
— The Ralph Retort

TPM’s Josh Marshall Reduced
To Tweeting Porno Link
Of ‘Teasing, Licking’ ‘Angela & Strawberry’
— The Daily Caller

Talking Points Memo Editor Josh Marshall
Tweets Out Link to Lesbian Porn
— Ace of Spades HQ

Of course, no one cares how Josh Marshall gets his jollies, except for the fact that he and the rest of the Democrat Party propaganda apparatus have spent the past two years promoting feminism as the core argument of a campaign to rid the world of patriarchal misogyny. And the evils of “objectification” of women by the “male gaze” was one of the core themes of Anita Sarkeesian’s attack on the videogame industry, which gave rise to the “Gamergate” controversy. If “the personal is political,” as feminists insist, then Josh Marshall’s porn addiction is politically problematic.

 

As Anita Sarkeesian has made clear, feminists are against any “personal choice” for women that is oriented toward male sexual pleasure, especially if this involves appealing to the “male gaze,” because feminist theory condemns male sexual interest in women as “objectification.” Yet because feminists are part of the Democrat Party coalition, “male allies” of the feminist movement are expected to ignore (or make excuses for) feminism’s anti-male/anti-heterosexual ideology.

 

Democrats use feminist rhetoric as a partisan weapon in a propaganda war to depict Republicans as “anti-woman,” and so the abusive behavior of male Democrats (e.g., Anthony Weiner, Eliot Spitzer, Bill Clinton) is never interpreted by feminists as evidence of a pervasive problem with their “male allies.” To admit the obvious truth — that Democrat men in general are predatory perverts who exploit “feminism” as a means to their own selfish ends — would require feminists to consider the possibility that Republicans are not actually the villainous sexist bogeymen that they’re portrayed to be by the liberal media. For feminists to tell the truth about their “male allies” would be to admit that feminism is just a scam, the same kind of phony hustle that enables Democrats like Bill Clinton to get rich by pretending to care about poor people.

Don’t expect any feminist — Amanda Marcotte, Jessica Valenti, Jill Filipovic, et al. — to criticize Josh Marshall for tweeting out lesbian porn. Feminists have no integrity, because if there is one thing the Democrat Party can never tolerate in its ranks, it’s people with integrity.



 

Category: Sex Trouble

Murder City, USA: Chicago Ends 2016 With Nearly 800 Homicides for Year

Posted on | January 2, 2017 | 2 Comments

 

The city’s gun-control laws are so effective:

An argument between two men at an Uptown bar in the early hours of Jan. 1 ended with the two shooting at one another, leaving both dead.
Their deaths ushered in the new year, marking the first and second homicides of 2017 and keeping up 2016’s pace of violence – levels that haven’t marred the city for 20 years.
By the time police were dispatched to the double homicide at 4:30 a.m. there had already been an officer-involved shooting, according to Chicago police. A man who led police on a car chase, before physically resisting arrest, ultimately was shot by an officer before 3 a.m. That man, whose name was not released and for whom a warrant was issued, was in critical condition Sunday.
The last homicide in 2016 came before 1 p.m. Saturday when a 24-year-old, whose name has not been released, was killed in South Austin in a possible road rage act that may have been retaliation for hitting another driver’s Mercedes. According to data from the Chicago Police Department, his death became the 762nd homicide for the year – the most since 1996, when there were 796.
Data kept by the Chicago Tribune tallied at least 781 homicides for the year; the Police Department statistics do not include killings on area expressways, police-involved shootings, other homicides in which a person was killed in self-defense or death investigations.
At the double homicide scene on Broadway Street near Wilson Avenue, a fire official said first responders found a 38-year-old man with gunshot wounds to the chest and right leg, as well as a second man, 25, who had multiple gunshot wounds to his right side. Both men were taken by ambulance to Illinois Masonic Hospital, where they later were pronounced dead, officials said.

The deadly violence in Chicago escalates year after year. In 2015, there were 468 murders in Chicago, a 12.5% increase over the 416 murders in 2014. In September, it was reported that Chicago had more murders that Los Angeles and New York City combined.

This is the city where Barack Obama was a “community organizer,” a city that in 2011 elected as its mayor former Obama chief of staff Rahm Emanuel. Chicago is a city where Hillary Clinton got 84% of the vote on Nov. 8 and, not coincidentally, it is also a city where hundreds of black people are murdered every year. Democrats are the Party of Death.

 

Category: Chicago, Crime

Rule 5 Sunday: Happy New Year!

Posted on | January 1, 2017 | 4 Comments

— compiled by Wombat-socho
Well, I hope everyone had a good time last night, no matter how you chose to spend it, and I hope 2017 hasn’t found you draped over the toilet expressing your regrets (among other things) over those good times. As for me, well, a driver drives. Today’s appetizer is Kate Beckinsale, perhaps best known as the star of the Underworld movies, which appear to be about a war between vampires and werewolves, but as Daddy Warpig says, “If you’re watching Underworld for the plot, YOU’RE WATCHING IT WRONG.”
As usual, most if not all of the following links are to pictures normally considered NSFW, and the management is not responsible for problems caused by your failure to click with discretion.

Proof that not all Rule 5 has to involve nudity.

We begin this week with Ninety Miles From Tyranny, who brings us Hot Pick of the Late Night, Morning Mistress Carly Baker, and Girls With Guns, followed by Goodstuff with Tara Reid’s Notorious Boobs and other delights. Animal Magnetism checks in with Rule 5 Buhbye 2016 Friday and the Saturday New Year’s Eve Gingermageddon.

EBL’s thundering herd this week included La La Land, Y The Last Man, Carrie Fisher, Debbie Reynolds (with a curtain call),  Kirstin Maldonado, the Peach Bowl,  Fiesta Bowl, Vintage Hollywood New Year’s, and Orange Bowl and Rose Bowl Queens.

A View From The Beach brings us Another Brazilian – Sophia Resing, Ariana Grande Objects to “Objectification”,Surfing into Thursday, To The Stars, Alice!, How About Some Paint for Wednesday?, RIP: Princess Leia, Mrs. Stephanopoulos!, California Man Charged with DUI for Caffeine, Happy Boxing Day!, Merry Christmas, Have Yourself a Merry Little Christmas!, and I, For One, Welcome Our New Overlords.

Proof Positive’s Friday Night Babe is Zoe Duchesne, his Vintage Babe is  Patricia Richardson, Sex in Advertising is covered by Victoria’s Secret, and there’s also Your Schadenfreude NFL/Niners Report. At Dustbury, it’s Savannah Guthrie and Gong Li.

Thanks to everyone for their linkagery!

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

Category: Rule 5

Donald Trump Will Be Our President, Because @Madeleine_Rae Is Crazy

Posted on | December 31, 2016 | 3 Comments

“If you’re a woman in today’s job market, it can be hard to find work. That’s why I recommend you ‘lean in’ — to the arms of a dying rich man.”
— Madeleine Davies, March 19, 2015

Madeleine Davies (@Madeleine_Rae on Twitter) is insane and a feminist, but I repeat myself. She graduated from the University of Wisconsin in 2010 and went to work for Gawker Media in 2011 and is now a “senior writer” at Jezebel, the feminist site that stumbles onward like a zombie despite the fact that its parent company got bankrupted by a professional wrestler. In short, Madeleine Davies’ life has been a long series of the kind of bad decisions you expect from a mentally ill liberal arts major. One imagines a therapy group of ex-Gawker writers meeting somewhere in Brooklyn, each telling the story of their lives leading up to the disastrous turning-point: “And then I went to work for Nick Denton.”

Madeleine Davis now works for Gizmodo News Group, a subsidiary of Univision that includes Jezebel and other ex-Gawker properties. Last month, Univision laid off 200 employees, because “social justice”:

Between 200 and 250 people are facing layoffs at the Spanish language conglomerate Univision, the company announced Wednesday, yet another reminder of the grim economic realities weighing down many newsrooms.
The layoffs, which were first reported by the Washington Post, will hit nearly 6% of the company’s workforce, primarily affecting Fusion, Univision’s millennial-focused news website that has struggled to find an audience. . . .
In his memo, [Univision executive Isaac] Lee said that Fusion will continue to be “a hub for some of our investigative work,” and will “focus its efforts by doubling-down on its award-winning reporting on issues of social justice and diversity.”

Meanwhile, a certain nutjob “senior writer” at Jezebel is still getting paid. Ms. Davies’ natural métier is humor (e.g., “I’m Pretty Sure Most Straight Men Would Have Sex with The Rock”), so her mental illness isn’t necessarily a problem. If a joke-writer is a barely functional wacko swallowing Zoloft tablets in an effort to stave off a complete psychotic meltdown, well, that’s not a good thing, but she’s just writing jokes, OK? However, an editor might think twice about assigning an unhinged kook to write about something serious, like politics.

 

This is where feminism becomes a career strategy for the emotionally unstable liberal arts major. Her irrational rage and frequent outbursts of lunatic gibberish can be justified as a commentary on her condition as an oppressed victim of heteronormative patriarchy. And nobody in the offices of Gizmodo News Group would dare criticize Madeleine Davies, because she might erupt in a tantrum of shrieking fury and threaten you with a class-action lawsuit for harassment and discrimination. Feminism is always a lose-lose proposition for the employer. A company that doesn’t hire enough women (and “enough” is a quantity subject to constant revision according to whatever percentage feminists consider a satisfactory quota) can be sued for discrimination. However, if you ever make the mistake of hiring a crazy feminist, you can never fire her.

 

Madeleine Davies could organize Jezebel staffers into a coven performing Dianic Wicca rituals in the coffee-break room, and Gizmodo executives couldn’t say a word without risking a federal discrimination complaint.

In terms of employment policy, feminism is just legalized blackmail — a shakedown racket, extortion as “social justice” — and the strategy of executives at Univision is crudely cynical: Keep a certain number of feminist writers on the payroll, as a loss-leader and a “social justice” gesture and, if anyone ever notices that the executives collecting enormous salaries are mostly white guys, you point in the direction of Madeleine Davies: “But we’re paying her, OK? She’s a senior writer!”

Tokenism, quota hires, everybody tiptoeing around the office trying to avoid offending the Perpetually Indignant Office Bitch — yeah, it’s almost as if there’s a reason why 63 million people would vote for a guy who personifies America’s resentment of that “social justice” crap.

 

Shortly before 4 p.m. on Election Day, Madeleine Davies published her column in defense of voting for a woman because she’s a woman — “representation,” as the Tumblr feminists say, while bemoaning the death of a lesbian character on a CW network sci-fi show. Symbolism is deeply important for emotionally unstable liberal arts majors, and Madeleine Davies explained this appeal in her Election Day column:

Earlier today, I walked to my neighborhood polling place wearing the same Barack Obama t-shirt that I wore when I voted for the very first time in 2008. I thanked the lady who handed me my ballot for donating her time to the noble cause of voting. I walked into the booth where I then cast my vote for Hillary Clinton, getting a little weepy as I did so, because I feel so immensely fortunate to vote for the person whom I hope and believe will become the first woman president. It was symbolic and it was performative, but what an honor to wear this symbol, to perform this role.

Yeah, and #LexaDeservedBetter, maybe. Or on the other hand, perhaps the dead lesbian trope in popular culture really is symbolic,  in some kind of Joseph Campbell comparative mythology sense. (Warning to casual readers: This next digression might be a long one.) Feminists and other secular progressives, influenced by Marxist theories of “class struggle,” would suffer an existential crisis — the loss of their weltanschauung — if they ever seriously considered either of two hypotheses:

  1. There is a natural order of human life, where the strong survive and flourish, and the weak are trampled down into servitude;
    or
  2. The Bible is true, and there is a transcendent God whose will may be known, whose laws are just, and who is eternally sovereign.

Both of these hypotheses must be excluded from consideration, if we are to buy into the Heaven on Earth promises of progressive cult leaders who urge us forward down the road to Progress and Equality. No matter how often radical egalitarianism fails — and the catastrophe in Venezuela is the latest example — the True Believer can never let go of what Thomas Sowell called The Vision of the Anointed. Having ruled out the possibility that the Bible is true, our atheistic elite are now fanatical devotees of the Cult of Social Justice. They cling to their quasi-religious belief system with a grim certainty, like Mohamed Atta piloting that Boeing 767 into the North Tower. “Vote Democrat” is their “Allahu Akbar.”

No matter how often you explain to them what’s wrong with their ideology, they refuse to let go, holding onto their faith in Equality and Progress like a 4-year-old clinging to his security blanket. Nobel Prize-winning economist Friedrich Hayek once published a book called The Mirage of Social Justice, the title of which summarizes the basic problem — progressives are pursuing an illusion, an impossible utopian ideal.

Has Madeleine Davies ever read that book? Of course not. Has anyone employed at Jezebel or Gizmodo Media Group ever read anything by Hayek or Ludwig von Mises or Thomas Sowell? Liberals love to assert that everyone who opposes them is “ignorant,” and yet I’ve read more Marx (and Engels, and Lenin and Trotsky) than has the average Marxist, just like I’ve read more feminist theory than have most feminists. It’s not that conservatives are “ignorant” of the Left’s ideas, but rather that the Left’s ideas don’t work — and they stubbornly refuse to read any of the books that explain why their ideas don’t work. The Left prefers ignorance to knowledge, because the facts are not their friends.

“Believe me, sir, those who attempt to level never equalise. In all societies, consisting of various descriptions of citizens, some description must be uppermost. The levellers therefore only change and pervert the natural order of things; they load the edifice of society, by setting up in the air what the solidity of the structure requires to be on the ground.”
— Edmund Burke, Reflections on the Revolution in France (1790)

Edmund Burke nailed it more than 200 years ago, but the Left refuses to accept reality. Their madcap dream of equality has been producing tyrannies since the Reign of Terror in France, and the 20th century saw Marxist-Leninist regimes murder some 100 million people. Yet these debacles have taught the Left nothing, nor have they learned anything from the increasing political, economic and demographic woes of European social democracies. Not only does the Left fail to understand history, they can’t even do simple arithmetic. During his 2015 State of the Union address, President Obama proposed two years of free community college tuition for everybody. Who’s going to pay for that $60 billion giveaway? The Democrat answer: Who cares? The national debt is now approaching $20 trillion— that’s trillion with a “T,” meaning $20,000,000,000,000 —  and interest payments on the national debt cost $223 billion, or 6 percent of the federal budget, in 2015. So for every dollar the IRS collects from taxpayers, only 94 cents is available for current needs, and the annual budget deficit in fiscal year 2015 was $439 billion out of $3.7 trillion. Yet there is no end to demands for even more deficit spending from the Moocher Caucus of Democrat voters who think the federal government exists to provide them with “free” stuff that the taxpayers can’t afford. In New Jersey, lesbians are suing for their “right” to free in-vitro fertilization treatment, and Democrats will denounce you as a homophobe if you don’t want to pay for it. The Democrats have ceased to be a political party and have become a psychiatric disease. Democrats no longer have policies, they have symptoms. But I digress . . .

Gripped by despair over the failure of Hillary Clinton to defeat the villainous Trump, feminists have become more irrational than ever. All their demented antics over the past two years — hysterical protests about “rape culture” on campus, etc. — were merely a prelude to the psychotic madness that has seized them in the wake of Trump’s election.

 

Thursday, Madeleine Davies published a column that began thus:

In 2001, when I was about 14 years old, my male friends invented a game that went like this: one of them — and it was always the same one — would sneak behind me, slap me — and it was always me — on the ass and run away as I sputtered, angry and humiliated.
It was a game that everyone but me seemed to love. I was a girl who mostly hung around boys because I hadn’t yet learned that female friendships, though infinitely more confusing, were also infinitely more rewarding. I was the self-professed type who loudly preferred spending time with men over spending time with women because they were less dramatic and complicated. And so I surrounded myself with boys who found it funny to grab my body when I least expected it, and were spurred by my discomfort to push me further and more painfully. . . .

Pause here, reader, and ask: Who were these boys? Where was this high school in which 14-year-old Madeleine Davies endured this treatment? Who were the parents of these boys? What, if anything, was the school administration doing to prevent such misbehavior? These questions are relevant because Madeleine Davies invokes her adolescent humiliation as an experiential justification for her anti-male political rage:

The truth . . . is that while it’s been ingrained in me to chase their acceptance and approval and be “in on the joke,” I was raised from birth to fear men, to never trust or expect them to protect me. Thirty years of being suffocated by their desires, whims, and power has only proven the fear as founded. In the years that followed . . . I would see good liberal boys, the ones who had feminist mothers and organized progressive political demonstrations, go completely silent when a high school acquaintance accused one of their own of rape. . . .

Do you see the irony here? Ms. Davies evidently grew up in a “progressive” community, and “good liberal boys . . . who had feminist mothers” were among the males she “was raised from birth to fear.” Nearly half a century after the Women’s Liberation movement emerged from the New Left of the 1960s, one might suggest that “liberation” has in many ways made life worse for young women. Such a suggestion would be denounced as “sexist,” however, so we are expected to bite our tongues, rather than to remark that American life was more civilized before all those hippie radicals began to “change and pervert the natural order of things.” As I say, progressives cling so ferociously to their weltanschauung that they wouldn’t even know how to begin considering the possibility that they are wrong. The Kool-Aid drinkers in the Cult of Social Justice are incapable of doubting their own moral superiority, their belief in Progress and Equality being the quasi-religious faith by which they will bring about Heaven on Earth.  And now, Madeleine Davies confronts the Beast of the Feminist Apocalypse:

Since the election of Donald Trump, I have felt like a clairvoyant who, instead of seeing ghosts, sees the specter of male destruction everywhere I look: in the money I spend, in the industry I work, even in the minds of other women — the ones too foolish to realize that men don’t protect them anymore or, somehow more offensive to me, the ones who’ve cynically embraced the concept of female empowerment as a brand or an excuse for selfishness, effectively wringing the term of its power and significance.
For the first time, I don’t know how to move past my boiling anger or laugh it away. Also for the first time, I have no desire to. Preferable, I now think, is to stop laughing, to become as repulsive as I can in an insult to these men — so many men — who hate women and the women who adulate them. . . . There are days when all I want is to become a human road sign, a blinking hazard to any man misfortunate enough to cross my path: “I WANT TO OFFEND YOUR SIGHT. I WANT TO OFFEND YOUR EVERYTHING.” . . .

Watch out, guys — she’s shifted into CAPS LOCK RAGE MODE.

Today, my 24-year-old paratrooper son came home from Fort Bragg, bringing with him his wife, an art student. His twin brother came over with his wife, a nursing student, and their two sons, ages 3 and 1. It was a happy holiday gathering, with five of our six children, two grandchildren, and my 18-year-old son’s girlfriend. My wife fixed a delicious meal, then my kids recruited me to participate in a Nerf-gun battle down in the family room, before we all sat down to watch the Peach Bowl, where Alabama defeated Washington to advance to the collegiate football national championship game. Life is good here, in our family’s modest Appalachian home, which makes it all the more amusing to sit here and see Madeleine Davies spew her “boiling anger” toward “these men . . . who hate women,” inspiring her “to become as repulsive as I can,” because “I WANT TO OFFEND YOUR EVERYTHING.” She continues:

But it’s the bad women who have always, however grotesquely, provided the limited examples of female resistance: Salome, demanding the head of John the Baptist; Medea punishing her husband’s betrayal with infanticide; Flannery O’Connor’s Hulga, who knew her birth name Joy was all wrong because it was light and airy and she wanted to be dense and ugly, like a swamp; Toni Morrison’s Sula, whose destructive joie de vivre led her to trample on the moral codes of others; the heroines of Ferrante, often cruel and spiteful because they’re too smart for the men who anchor them to the miserable world that they created. All of the women terrible in someway or another — but also strikingly bold in their effrontery.
Women, though not always “good,” have always been nice. And look where it’s gotten us. Stripped of our rights, degraded, and still under the thumb of men. . . .

What a strange choice of heroines she makes with Salome, daughter of Herodias, whose illegal marriage John the Baptist had criticized, leading to John’s imprisonment and his execution at Salome’s request (Matthew 14:3-11, Luke 3:19-20, 9:9, Mark 6:17-28). Is Salome an example of “female resistance” worthy of emulation? Wasn’t she rather an example of the decadence of the Judean aristocracy under Roman rule?

Ah, but this is the problem with our young progressives, isn’t it? They don’t know history, and therefore are unable to distinguish between progress and decadence, just as their lack of morality renders them incapable of distinguishing between good and evil. All they value is power, and to a feminist like Madeleine Davies, the example of Salome — who used her power, such as it was, to have a prophet beheaded — must be heroic. Yet the feminist pursuit of power had failed, and Ms. Davies sees Trump’s election as proof that women are “degraded . . . still under the thumb of men.” Her rage is as infinite as it is incoherent:

I am not yet disgusting to the right people — the ones with power are blind to me. Any optimism I’ve had in regards to changing the destructive course of history has faded, with most of my idealism, into the past. . . . Now, all I hope for is to cause my own sort of minor destruction to the men who would otherwise take things away from me. I can never hurt them as much as they’ve hurt us (nor do I have the heart to), but can I hurt them at all? . . .
I’m writing in a circle that keeps leading me back to the same questions: How do I become ugly to these people? How do I offend their sensibilities with my very existence?

Well, Ms. Davies, you’ve done enough already, haven’t you? I do not think Americans are as irrational as you are, and I think that you are the reason why Donald Trump will be our next president. Not just you, of course, but all your comrades in the feminist movement — Jessica Valenti, Amanda Marcotte, Anita Sarkeesian, Alexandra Brodsky, Jaclyn Friedman, et al. — have made yourselves quite the collective nuisance during the past few years, reminding a lot of people of exactly why they hate feminists.

 

 

 

Does that look like a mainstream political movement to you? Do these people look like they can be trusted with political power? Do Americans wish to be governed by CAP LOCKS FEMINIST RAGE?

Everybody’s got their own theory of why Trump won, but has it occurred to anyone that Hillary Clinton’s candidacy — and the outspoken feminist support for her campaign — caused the American people to take a closer look at what feminism really is? As I have been saying for months, Feminism Is a Totalitarian Movement to Destroy Civilization as We Know It, and maybe 63 million voters recognize this truth.

Thanks to you, Madeleine Davies, our next president will be your worst nightmare. Inspired by our new president’s policies, maybe the executives at Univision will take a long, hard look at the bottom-line value of Jezebel staffers (meeting weekly for Wicca rituals in the coffee-break room) and decide they don’t need so many “senior writers.”

My advice to you, Ms. Davies, is to update your resumé and get out while the getting’s good. You’ve got so many ideas about career strategies, and I’m sure many potential employers will be impressed by your qualifications as Perpetually Indignant Office Bitch. Good luck!



 

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