Free [sic] speech on campus
Ace notes that even some liberal professors on campus are becoming alarmed (although for the wrong reasons) about the closed, doctrinaire, power-driven, anti-free-speech tactics of the social justice [sic] warriors on campus. He quotes a liberal professor named Edward Schlosser who writes at Vox:
This new understanding of social justice politics resembles what University of Pennsylvania political science professor Adolph Reed Jr. calls a politics of personal testimony, in which the feelings of individuals are the primary or even exclusive means through which social issues are understood and discussed. Reed derides this sort of political approach as essentially being a non-politics….
Personal experience and feelings aren’t just a salient touchstone of contemporary identity politics; they are the entirety of these politics. In such an environment, it’s no wonder that students are so prone to elevate minor slights to protestable offenses.
The press for actionability, or even for comprehensive analyses that go beyond personal testimony, is hereby considered redundant, since all we need to do to fix the world’s problems is adjust the feelings attached to them and open up the floor for various identity groups to have their say. All the old, enlightened means of discussion and analysis –from due process to scientific method — are dismissed as being blind to emotional concerns and therefore unfairly skewed toward the interest of straight white males. All that matters is that people are allowed to speak, that their narratives are accepted without question, and that the bad feelings go away.
While I read that, I was thinking “Schlosser’s afraid to say it, but he’s mainly talking about the influence of female students on the type of allowable discourse on campus these days.” Lo and behold, when I got to Ace’s commentary right afterward, he had written much the same thought: “This emotion-based style of ‘argumentation’ is, it is forbidden to say, chiefly a female one (a dopey, girlish female one, not a womanly one), and one that has been lately adopted by the more female-skewing girlboys who are easily dominated by group will.”
Yes.
And let me add that I experienced this personally (as an observer, not a target) in the early 90s when I returned to school for a Master’s degree. The trend was already quite highly developed and deeply entrenched at the time, much to my surprise, even though it had escaped my notice till I returned to campus life.
But I discovered it when the young women in an undergraduate class I was required to take for my Master’s—a class which, being in the social sciences, consisted almost entirely of women—were virtually all in favor of a definition of actionably offensive speech that went something like this: “speech that offends any person in the subjective sense, rather than speech that is in fact objectively offensive.” In vain I stood up in front of the 100-or-so students, most of them around twenty years younger than I, to ask what the limits of this might be, to suggest that it was wrong to allow the most sensitive among us to dictate what was unacceptable, and to speak up for free speech in general. I was met with uncomprehending stares and impatient dismissal, a fossil in my own time.
I realized that something was terribly, terribly wrong. Not one person appeared to agree with me, or if they did they weren’t saying so publicly or privately. And the professor, a woman just a couple of years younger than I, was clearly on their side. I have never forgotten it, and although at the time I didn’t put it in a political left/right context (that came later), I realized it was a frightening development and it made me feel very, very uneasy and quite alone.
Things have only got worse, with the advent of the internet, social media, and twenty-five more years of student marination in leftist memes. Campus liberals are now starting to feel its hot breath on their necks.
[NOTE: Two excellent and somewhat-related pieces: this and this. The latter is the chilling story of the Kafkaesque nightmare that liberal professor Laura Kipnis faced when was so bold as to criticize the “creeping bureaucratization and fear that surrounds sexual activity on campus.”]
‘Mean girls’ politics.
The ‘rules’ of the activist game, including on campus, aren’t HS debate club, though words are gear. They’re mass and maneuver.
I teach business, sociology, and political science on the undergrad level, and I run into this all the time. Millennials, for the most part, do not grok the concept that it’s disagreeable speech that must be protected, as in “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.” Even when you explain it to them they don’t get it. Twelve years in the public school system has warped their brains.
G Joubert:
They have not been taught the principles on which America rests.
For them, does not compute.
“I was met with uncomprehending stares and impatient dismissal…. I realized that something was terribly, terribly wrong. Not one person appeared to agree with me, or if they did they weren’t saying so publicly or privately. And the professor…was clearly on their side. I have never forgotten it….”
Clearly you were traumatized by this event. You should have demanded that you be allowed to have your say, and that you be accepted and supported without question. Their speech offended you, subjectively.
Mr. Hoffer, meet Mr. Alinsky.
I think this a trend of three things in modern schools.
1. Historical ignorance the refusal to teach the history of America.
2. Liberal Indoctrination.
3. The self-esteem movement. I had to go through this as a kid. Sometime during as a kid I realized something. The people who had the highest self-esteem were bullies. The people who picked on me all thought they greatest people in the world. I grew very skeptical of the whole self-esteem reinforcement.
(For the record, I also got the liberal indoctrination but my parents were conservatives who challenged me. Also this was during in elementary school when I lived in Lubbock Texas, so most of the teacher did not really believe it themselves.)
“They have not been taught the principles on which America rests.”
And it goes a step further. They’ve been taught other principles, and they believe in only these principles.
I’m kind of glad that Ace differentiated between dumb kids and actual women. I don’t know if anyone else has noticed it, but it seems like conservative blog comment sections have been taken over by rampant female bashing of the worst kind. PJ Media is nearly unreadable. It used to be that that garbage was limited to the shameless pick up artist blogs but it has definitely spread like a disease. It’s disturbing to say the least.
Perhaps you should have shouted at them, “Why are you not supporting MY feelings?”
Matilda:
You probably have no idea just how correct you are, and what an enormous loss all of that crassness will be in the long run.
I boycott PJ Media : ), among many other websites.
Anna: that’s kind of disturbing to hear. I used to occasionally read Roissy (infamous pick up artist) back when he was still kind of an internet oddity. I haven’t read him in years, but lately half the internet denizens with keyboards are much, much *worse* than Roissy ever was. It raises all kinds of red flags to me.
Women are like leftists or muslims. They are not well behaved when they are in a position of power. The world does not work according to their ideas of fairness.
I find it curious that there is not, among the young women today, *nearly* the same concentration of *nearly* analogous venom in their rhetoric against men, and certainly not *nearly* as elaborated into entire pseudo-evo-psych theories about the irredeemable nature of the other sex.
A young woman today must be very careful with suitors. The venom is so pervasive that it is more likely than not that the young man has come into a significant contact with it, even if only by accident. Combine that with pornified popular culture and pornography sensu stricto, for many young men THOSE now form the bulk of their symbolic world, their cultural references, and set the mental framework for relationships. If you do not recognize it early on and filter out those men from the suitors pool, it will psychologically destabilize you as you continue to bond.
Not that there does not *exist* a female version of this nonsense, but it has been not only my impression that the two are of completely different levels of magnitude (as a social phenomenon and as to how theoretically elaborate they are). It is a very good idea to read some of that venom just to know how what you should avoid looks like (and, more subtly, what kind of reasoning and implicit values you should screen out), but I see that for most women any exposure to that is almost literally nauseating.
(Which is not to say that there are still not very many good young men today – but you might be surprised, if only as a *cultural reference*, how many of them still know much about these online places and subcultures.
I used to be disturbed by occasional comments on conservative websites, but as they started to be more frequent over the last few years, at some point I discovered the pseudo-philosophical base behind them. And my male friends, by and large, *already knew* of it when I asked them about these websites, “philosophies”, and the most prominent people associated with them. Not that acquaintance alone is indicative of active support – to the contrary, in their case – but there is something disturbing about the fact that this has turned into a fairly mainstream reference.)
Anna is speaking of how unsightly and ugly slave rebellions are. Which they are. They also don’t tend to reproduce functional societies either, even when successful.
Also retribution against crimes of humanity or other perceived atrocities, also aren’t pretty.
It’s the idea that we’re all in the same society, that we all function under the social compact, that misleads people into underestimating the Left or the situation as it stands. The social compact no longer exists. Even if one could argue successfully that no one or everyone broke it, it’s still broken, so it doesn’t matter what people think caused it.
Your civilization is dead. Is that too hard for women or men to understand? Or is it because some males understand it, that people find it disagreeable when they live in the same society?
In order for something to be “objectively offensive” we would have to have a common frame of reference-a general cultural agreement of what is right or wrong. That once would have been, however imperfectly, based on a shared Judeo-Christian moral system .
Now liberals and conservatives have taken the words of Jesus to “judge not” completely out of the context of what He was saying and twisted it to mean the only real offense is say someone’s actions are wrong. So we can no longer say something is “objectively wrong”, unless we can tie it to the actions of a perceived “oppressor” group.
Just to throw in a different thought: I wonder how much influence high tuition fees have on this?
I raise this as someone who lives in a country where college tuition fees are a recent introduction.
When the high costs of tuition fees in the US are discussed the college students are usually seen as unfortunate victims. Might it not also be the case that paying thousands of dollars to sit in a lecture hall gives one a sense of entitlement?
In such a situation I might well feel that it was up to me to decide whether Lena Dunham was better than Shakespeare.
This is not to dismiss the influence of political correctness etc. just to suggest that high fees change the relationship between student and professor. The kid who has spent all summer baling hay to go to college might look on his Latin professor with veneration. The kid who has borrowed against his future earnings as a top Hollywood script writer does not hold his film studies professor in such high esteem.
This might not be so much the revolution devouring its own as America’s professors slowly waking up to the fact that they are now the servants of the little monsters they have created.
A fossil in my own time.
Now there is a phrase that straks a chord!
My own experience around the same time centered around boat people from Cuba. We were taught about al the problems in Cuba and the persecution these people were going through. At the same time our Supreme Court had determined these folks were economic refugees and could be safely returned.
Test question. What type of refugee are these folks.
I said economic and got it wrong. I asked the professor who IS the determiner? Him? Me? The boat people who may have reasons for saying one thing over another or the Supreme Court.
I did get my grade changed though no one ever agreed with me.
I am an old woman. The link below is something I wrote in 2010, when I was a full-time student at Los Angeles City College. That college was all-disruption-all-the-time. Almost all the disruption was caused by females. If all the males who caused disruption had shut up, I wouldn’t have noticed a difference. If all the disruptive females had shut up, it would have been Peace in the Valley for me.
The We Don’t Want to Hear You Club:
http://wedontwanttohearyouclub.blogspot.com/
Women ruin everything.
I’m not kidding, either. Once there’s a certain proportion of women in a field, activity, or organization, it stops doing what it’s supposed to do and turns into a stage for their endless psychodrama and status games.
The social sciences? Once known as history, anthropology, geography: studied verifiable facts about people, places and societies. Turned majority-female and now whole academic disciplines produce nothing but bullshit and propaganda.
Government? Once a small, necessary function run by men who had achieved things in life before turning to politics. Then women started voting. Now it consumes a third of all we make, endlessly expanding programs, endlessly seeking ever more ways to intrude in our lives. The majority of non-military government workers? Women. Those innumerable bureaucrats and caseworkers , meddling and pestering but somehow never confronting actual evildoers.
Business? Is it a coincidence that economic growth has ground to a stop in America in synch with the feminization of the workplace?
Literature? Now written by women, for women editors, sold to women readers. Men have given up on books entirely because there is literally nothing there for them. All psychodrama, feelings, handbags, and status games.
I could go on all fucking day. Call me a horrible misogynist if you wish. Women love calling names and shunning people who hurt their feelings.
This post makes an excellent point. I was going to say that I’d been wondering when people were going to start pointing out that this crazed stuff is predominantly a female phenomenon, but from what y’all say it is being pointed out on various right-wing sites. (This one and National Review, occasionally American Conservative, are the only ones I read regularly. And I haven’t seen this anti-woman rhetoric that y’all are referring to.)
One other thing worth mentioning, though: the syndrome under discussion was clearly present in the feminist movement as far back as I was paying attention, which was in the early ’70s. The famous slogan “the personal is the political” was a manifestation of it, a response to men complaining that feminists took things too personally.
Arrest Warrants Issued To People Who Cheered At High School Graduation
http://houston.cbslocal.com/2015/06/03/arrest-warrants-issued-to-people-who-cheered-at-high-school-graduation
i have recently heard the term “caucasian infestation” on campus… among other things…
Its part of “social justice movement” politics replacing feminism since the women self exterminated and their numbers are disappearing and so will have to be ignored. (wait till they figure out what they did!!!!)
The True Origin of Man By Kenneth Smith
He went down into Europe by longboat to raid, pillage, plunder, and rid the land of what they considered a Caucasian infestation upon the earth…. [very liberalese kind of book that mishmoshes history of vikings and others]
Why Can’t Western Washington University Get Rid of Pesky White People?
The Strange Things We Learn From Brilliant Academic Minds.
It all starts in The President’s Office. The leader of an organization represents its values. That leader is a living, breathing symbol. So if you want to get rid of the Caucasian Infestation, you have to fire the HCIC* first to set the proper example.
HCIC = Head Caucasoid in charge..
i wonder if there will be ovens this time, or will they be patient and allow the feminist induced population collapse to take care of it in less than ten years (as the census celebrates and informs us)?
Dont worry, the feminists have a solution
Feminists on social media have started a campaign called “give your money to women,” or “Giveyourmoneytowomen” on Twitter.
The point of the campaign is that, according to its creators, men benefit from numerous privileges, including the patriarchy and earning more money than females. For that reason, men should literally give money to women for no other reason than that they are female.
Social Justice was an American Roman Catholic periodical published by Father Charles Coughlin during the late 1930s and early 1940s
Social Justice was controversial for printing antisemitic polemics such as The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Coughlin claimed that Marxist atheism in Europe was a Jewish plot against America. The December 5, 1938, issue of Social Justice included an article by Coughlin which reportedly closely resembled a speech made by Joseph Goebbels on September 13, 1935, attacking Jews, atheists and Communists, with some sections being copied verbatim by Coughlin from an English translation of the Goebbels speech.
of course the feminists and others bringing Sprachregelung to america as politically correct speech, would not be noticed for what it is, because americans are idiots and dont have german dictionaries…
the major issue is that the christian social justice is something different than the secular social justice, and gets the religious to sign on based on mislabeling
[Endlé¶sung is the “final solution of the jewish question”]
now, have we taken the same course in the US with feminists copying the nazis? how many terms did feminism undewr the guise of equality change in the people? how many other terms did the left change under social justice, etc?
you could not achieve the same goal without changine the words or else even idiots would see… once you change the word conflagration to holocaust, the idea of synonym is forgotten and the idiots believe its something else.
“This way to the egress…”
well, we HAD personell departments, which became human resources… no?
Christmas Party is now Holiday Party
Christmas Holiday / Winter Break
Easter Holiday / Spring Break
Morality / Social Oppression
Perversion / Diversity
Islamic Terrorism / Man-caused disaster
Husband or wife / Significant other/life partner
Fertile / Breeder
Anti-life / Pro-choice
But like those terms above and lots of others i can list, it no longer means charity and religious ideas… (your first clue is the atheist left is taking up a christian concept from the hated and to them nazi loving roman catholics?)
Social Justice, also known as economic justice, is a term describing the redistribution of wealth for the common good of all. However, this comes at the expense of wage earners and liberty by demanding a society to conform. Those who work and have must give to those who don’t work and don’t have. This is the fundamental basis of Marxism and championed by liberal progressives. Everyone shall have equal advantages and everyone will have equal disadvantages. In reality it creates two classes, those with power and everyone else.
so they are not going to get rid of the divide, they are getting rid of the bridge (middle class) and making a moat, which will make the divide permanent…
they do this by getting their manic gerbils to believe they are working to end the divide, so they work hard, but if you paint exit on the entrance signs, and entrance on the exit signs, and yell fire, you can get them to run into the fire, by the time they figure it out, they have been burned and and there is no way out..
throw some corn and wait, the hogs will come, then build one wall of a fence, put corn, the hogs will come and get used to the fence. do that twice more… then the last time you do it, make sure that the last fence has a door and its open… put the corn out, when the hogs come, close the door, and send them to the ovens, camps, etc
I agree with much of what you have said here. I do. I love the Belmont Club on PJMedia – The commenters are the best anywhere. I feel that most are male. I rarely comment there because I am just not that articulate.
“Trimegistus Says:
June 4th, 2015 at 9:37 am”
I agree with this comment – somehow – it did not show up!
Ritalin turns boy-boys into girlieboys, makes them tractable, stay in their seats. It is part of our pharmacologic makeover to generate more sheeple.
I knew a guy in high school who was fond of misquoting Voltaire, thusly:
“Death to what you say, and I disagree with your right to say it”
He was kidding (I think.) Today’s SJWs are not.
In Goethe’s Faust, Gretchen has a friend named Lieschen, who takes a lot of pleasure in persecuting and humiliating women who have violated the sexual moral code of the time. Gretchen has been complicit in some of this, and–too late–realizes her error:
How readily I used to blame
Some poor young soul that came to shame!
Never found sharp enough words like pins
To stick into other people’s sins
Black as it seemed, I tarred it to boot
And never black enough to suit
Would cross myself, exclaim and preen—
Now I myself am bared to sin!
Yet all of it that drove me here
God! ws so innocent, was so dear!
If Lieschen had lived in 2015, she would have been a SJW, and if today’s female SJWs had lived in the time of Faust, they would have acted just like Lieschen.
http://chicagoboyz.net/archives/12144.html
For those wondering why mankind is (supposedly) satisfied with the current social values and dead civilization they work to death to preserve, look no further than Instapundit’s wife, Helen or the infamous arch villain of SFWA, VoxDay.
http://pjmedia.com/drhelen/
http://www.voxday.blogspot.com/
Those citizens of the internet, might want to take advantage of their status and see for themselves what’s really going on.
Social justice could only be maintained via social order and a common civilization. Which means when gender equality came out, it was a deception. There can be no equality between genders or classes, only equality that exists is between individual A and individual B, due to free will. The moment there is a hierarchy, let alone a Leftist one, “equality” goes out the window. Unless you think a colonel is outranked by a private and gets to clean latrines based on what a private says.
In order to craft social justice, males had certain tools to control the majority of boys and men acting out of line. In order to craft social justice, females had certain tools they could use to control other women and modulate their behaviors.
The creation of “gender equality” by the Left has destroyed the balance, and the civilization is pretty much dead too.
If people want to know why males are “acting” out, it’s because feminists invade them on their home front, the gaming industry or some other field, with accusations of “dead beat dads” or “useless husbands” or “boys on porn internet”. Physical violence is outlawed, but verbal violence is a specialization of females, to make up for the lack of physical force. Many things are true, but things used to be held in private, so people could suffer in private. Now that feminists are raiding cake shops and churches and destroying the final defense line of their enemies, you aren’t going to get this mystical “toleration” that you got before. You know why you got it before? because Alpha Males used the power of violence to keep the crazy males and the average boys in check. Now that people give power to the feminists, the females, there’s no Alpha Males with sufficient authority or respect. Not in Baltimore. Not in Ferguson. There is no one person, not Jackson or Sharpton, that can order the male thugs to surrender or quit. It’s like you killed all the officers and NCOs, then expect to somehow be able to control the troops from looting and rapine.
Males don’t obey females because males are afraid of females. Males obey females because stronger alphas, killers, and physically devastating patriarchs told the males to obey or else.
That’s what your “civilization” was built on, before many of you saw it killed or helped kill it to begin with.
To use a very easy frame of reference that bypasses certain Leftist mind control techniques being used on today’s sheeple that thinks themselves wolves with fangs:
The dormitory system used to have a dorm head, a patriarch to cover the boys, and a matriarch to cover the girls. This was clearly a hierarchical system, but one that didn’t cross genders or sexes. The male patriarch ensured that the males would obey the rules and that anyone caught invading the territory of the Other, the female dormitories, would be socially crucified or literally crucified depending on the extent of the infraction.
The matriarch would be older or more dependable than the other girls, and would act as a counselor, older sister, or mother figure. She would warn the girls the dangers of letting strangers, unknown men, or boys into the dorm. Not merely the danger to themselves but the danger to their sisters. If a girl was lowering the worth of a maiden’s virginity, she would be ostracized and punished, verbally, for being a whore and cast out or ridiculed to fix her behavior. The girls would compete directly with other girls for valuable resources.
The males would be fighting to formulate a disciplined pack hierarchy as well. The strongest at the top, the wisest advising the strongest, and the weakest, laziest, dumbest ones at the bottom, obeying orders. Where they belong.
The feminazis was somehow able to conduct a bloodless coup in the female dormitories, a kind of Russian serf revolt. It put the most bloodthirsty, dumbest, viceful, and wicked girls on top of the female hierarchy. They determined how to ensure that they stayed on top, and thus sought to destroy marriage and female virtue.
So far they have consolidated their powers and are now going after the rest of us.
There, an easy analogy from a once golden past, something people can more easily understand, when they don’t understand politics, strategy, tactics, or humans.
Womyn raise the boys.
Enjoy your handy work for,
It has come to pass,
That men need Womyn like a fish needs a bicycle …
Ymarsakar Says:
“Anna is speaking of how unsightly and ugly slave rebellions are.”
No; she’s just talking about generalising.
and I’m not saying you’re wrong about it being a slave rebellion. 🙂 It is IMO. Just not all women are on the other side.
A female dominated society will be *nannyism to the
enth degree* plus a helicopter state, in other words it will be *everything* you could not stand about your mom when you were a kid….
& don t forget the mommy mantra of *fairness*….
(excuse me while I vomit)
I raise 3 kids eschewing all those above mentioned typical mommy techniques & the kiddos are well adjusted, happy, & married !!! & tatoo less to boot !
Neo, I had a similar experience recently with a young feminist (Masters in Women’s Studies) who told me I was too old to understand what equality for women is about. I’m a woman in a tech field dominated by men, I manage a team of male software developers, and I do it well. But of course, she knows better. She thinks it’s about sex without shame, remorse, or consequences. Today’s young women are spoiled and sadly off track, and they’re horribly obnoxious about it.
LisaM:
Next time she (or some other woman) tries telling you that, I have a suggestion. Tell her that it’s sad to see that she’s been co-opted and brainwashed into adopting a male-centric definition of sex and sexuality.
See what she says 🙂 .
I, too, found that unthinking sheep-like “thinking” in grad school. Not in my core major (computers, technology, science), but in the Ed classes.
What a bunch of wusses – even for women.
One “girl” – with tears in her eyes – told of her undergraduate days, when her class was told that women wouldn’t pass the course. She dropped it, and her ambitions to be a STEM major.
Boy, did she get mad when I pointed out that men bluff all the time, and she got conned into dropping the course – and, of course, fulfilling the prof’s prophecy.
Women on the average tend to be more conformist than men: maybe this is purely cultural but there’s probably at least some genetic component. And conformists act as propagaters and amplifiers of whatever the dominant opinion is at any point in time, making it more dominant still.
If this is true, then the political implications–given women’s increasing power in America and other western societies–are considerable and unpleasant.
Next time she (or some other woman) tries telling you that, I have a suggestion. Tell her that it’s sad to see that she’s been co-opted and brainwashed into adopting a male-centric definition of sex and sexuality.
Why? Waste of time. Like trying to teach a pig to read. You get dirty and it annoys the pig … etc.
Boy, did she get mad when I pointed out that men bluff all the time, and she got conned into dropping the course — and, of course, fulfilling the prof’s prophecy.
Top feminist academics that have respectable diverse doctorates from medieval art to 6th century English to Women’s Studies gathered at the University of Toronto meeting center to discuss if human flatulence could be sexist.
Ashleigh Ingle, a proud feminist and an anarchist, argued that because of patriarchal gender norms women were not allowed to release gas in public because of men’s unreal expectations of women to be clean and feminine. Furthermore she articulated that if a woman was to fart in the presence of a man and the man responded by farting louder than the woman, then that would be rape.
“By farting louder the man is using passive aggressive violence to position himself as dominant. This intimidates the woman to subconsciously not release as much flatulence and thus the woman fearing for her safety doesn’t fart as loud as a sign of submissiveness. This in turn contributes to rape culture and women being oppressed.”
I blame to women.
I am G6loq.
There is something in the air in the US, an awkward zeitgeist, that does not find nearly as fertile ground in Europe. It affects both men and women in large numbers, but in different ways, so men apparently perceive it as “so many women gone crazy” while women perceive it as “so many men gone crazy”.
I cannot stand the venom, the selective dumping of all social ills onto women (in some conservative circles). Often when I read such opinions I wonder how is it possible that I frequently share political views with people so coarse in other things in life – relationships, artistic sensibility etc.
Trimegistus – Interesting you should mention literature; there certainly is a male version of popular, mass production literary trash, it just covers different genres (fantasy, crime fiction) than the female version of the trash (romance novels).
Anna:
I agree with you. There are many websites dedicated to bashing women in the crudest of ways, and doing it to women in general. The venom is something astounding. It’s amazing that with such a poisonous attitude these guys get any women (other than the financially reimbursed) to have sex with them, but they succeed in doing so (if we are to take their word for it).
There’s enough male and female stupidity and nastiness to go around.
However, I do see this particular movement on campus as being far more female-generated and female-centric than male. Women and men are different in general, although individuals differ and there’s plenty of overlap. One of the things I’ve learned over the course of my (now rather long) life is that, although I am a heterosexual female and have always considered that I look and act quite feminine, some of the ways in which my mind works and in which I operate interpersonally are not stereotypically feminine. And the women with whom I’ve interacted (friends and relatives) puzzle me as often, if not more often, than the men.
G6loq:
You never can tell what’s a waste of time and what can spark a thought that leads to another thought that leads to some sort of change.
And it would also be a thing that could give the speaker some satisfaction to say, so there’s that.
G6loq:
I did a little research on that feminist fart stuff, and from what I can gather it’s most probably bogus. A spoof.
I certainly hope so, anyway.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=250&v=0vJPL6PYDTM
This is what the world is doing while Americans self destruct and slaughter the strongest patriots in recent human existence. (Fort Hood 1, 2, Navy, purging of patriotic factions due to Democrat generals)
North Korea also has several women bureaucrats in photos I’ve seen.
The “patriarchy” Americans are fighting against is a funny propaganda control device. They are as militarized and obedient as the Russians and Ukrainians. They just think they are “free” unlike their foreign counter parts. The military is merely a hierarchy, where when an order comes, no matter what it is, it will be obeyed. Much as if Jesus or God commanded their disciples, the disciples would obey that command. No matter the price. We have seen what religious fanaticism lends to the Muslims and the Arabs. It is no minor joke, what people usally find funny about Mormons, the Amish, and the Jehovah’s Witnesses. Westerners think they are free, thus they do not suffer under a military esque hierarchy. How little do they know the truth.
The idea that the patriarchy is this creepy, old fashioned, obsolete system that has women in the kitchen and barefoot, is a quaint concept. One born of Leftist fevered dreams of dominion and conquest more than anything that reality considered workable. While weaklings find internet comments “unsettling” and uncomfortable, the world produces warriors and soldiers that will gladly kill you. But that’s not uncomfortable, because that’s something Americans refuse to accept as important. Like Hussein on the golf course, they got their head stuck in the sand waving their hands around, ordering the tsunami to pass them by unharmed.
Every nation has a legendary myth that helps generate continued value retention across the generations. Defense, virtue, work ethic, and a whole assembly of various other cultural add ons. Yet few nations have survived this.
“A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to fear.”
A nation survives through a multitude of mistakes and correct actions. People hope that the lives sacrificed and the work given, produces more good than mistakes.
America is ruled by foreign terrorists, or essentially will be. That’s not a “mistake”. That’s not the Russians making up back story to make themselves look good, so they can maintain civic morale in wars and peace. That’s gone far beyond the limit.
Meanwhile, people are busy taking advantage of their civilian peace and the Fall of Iraq and Afghanistan, to talk about some annoying domestic factions they don’t like, such as males making rude and outrageous comments on internet threads like non upstanding denizens. Can ya believe that.
And it would also be a thing that could give the speaker some satisfaction to say, so there’s that.
By all means, punch Leftists in the face until the sun sets, even if it is done using lower echelon verbal violence it matters not. The impact is about the same given repetition.
There is something weird going on. I’ve seen it in the world of online literature and lit-blogs. Look at the sheer craziness unleashed against Tao Lin and others in late 2014.
I’ve come into close contact with almost too many lesbians to talk about comfortably — from friends ten years ago and more in the lit-world to my sister (and now her daughter) to my ex-wife.
So much on this thread rings unfortunate bells for me, stuff that it’s hard to think about right now, today, this instant… even to someone mentioning the name “Roissy” and I wonder if you all know this originates in “Story of O”?
I have MS and I’m not having a good day and I just can’t think about this too hard right now, it’s too painful — but I’m glad Neo brought this all up and I hope she and others will think further about the ramifications without letting them drive you insane.
Because although there really is a war between Ms and Fs right now it’s not every single M or every single F who desire this to be the case. There’s a great deal, however, that most people are afraid to even think about much less discuss.
A spoof.
I certainly hope so, anyway.
Hee, hee, a spoof. Point is … we can’t tell anymore.
This is not a spoof:
Mansplaining while manspreading:
Scene: You’re a woman, sitting on a bench reading a book. Your male friend sees you on the quad and comes over to say hello and talk. You put down your book, lean back against the bench and smile. He doesn’t sit next to you; instead, he puts his foot on the bench and leans over his knee.
So sexist, right?
That scene is depicted in a statue at the University of the Incarnate Word in San Antonio, Texas, and despite no sign of distress or physical assertion, some women have decided it is a statue of “mansplaining” – a term used to describe men condescendingly explaining something to a woman.
Seriously. Here’s the actual statue and the claim of misogyny.
Some dudes got booked for manspreading in the NY subway. [note: I do not approve of manspreading and of crossing legs while wearing sharp stiletto shoes.]
I am G6loq.
You never can tell what’s a waste of time and what can spark a thought that leads to another thought that leads to some sort of change.
It is not thought that precedes change, it is the Willpower that forces the thought to fruition.
The reason why Leftists don’t change is not because their mind is unchanged, but because their Will has not changed from the spineless wretches that they were born as and remained still to now. The exceptional ones, the rare few, found that will power and changed themselves, first and foremost. Rather than the mind controlling the body or vice a versa, it is the spirit, the soul, the Willpower that controls both.
I cannot stand the venom, the selective dumping of all social ills onto women (in some conservative circles).
I gather that you don’t confront them to study their response and ideology. You are a passive observer because you refrain from conflict.
That inability to compete or wade in to contest the territory, is a sign of something. It is what the Authorities count on for obedience.
Conflict is the spice of life. Life would be rather bland without conflict. Civilization makes it possible for people to “get along to go along”. Although that’s also known as corruption.
miklos:
So sorry to hear you’re having a bad day with MS. Hope you feel better soon.
http://voxday.blogspot.com/2015/06/tales-of-vibrant-america.html
How some foreigners view America, when they happen to read English.
Know why I don’t get “uncomfortable” reading crazy talk on the internet? Because if they were really crazy, they would hunt me down in the Reality Plane, then I could permanently ship them back (Return to Sender) in a body bag by police express faster than I could write 10 posts here at Neo’s blog.
Getting uncomfortable or upset or scared about some verbal comments on the internet, that’s going to save the civilization all right.
When the black thugs come for people, what are they going to do exactly? Talk about their feelings and how their whiteness is being offended by the violence?
Matthew noted:
“The self-esteem movement. I had to go through this as a kid. Sometime during as a kid I realized something. The people who had the highest self-esteem were bullies. The people who picked on me all thought they greatest people in the world. I grew very skeptical of the whole self-esteem reinforcement.”
I don’t know if many know this, but those with the highest self-esteem of all, who rarely believe they’re wrong about anything, are convicted criminals in prison. Nothing was ever their fault.
The self-esteem movement as such was invented by Nathaniel Branden, a follower of (and much-young lover of) Ayn Rand. So maybe someone can start putting together the “virtues of selfishness” and other tenets of Randian thought and where this crosses over with for one thing the tendency of wealthy baby-boomers to have only-children families, and how only children are treated and grow up differently from children in the past. I’m not up to the heavy lifting but I know there’s something. Luc Ferry, for one, has pointed out differently parents regarded their children in the time of Montaigne.
Read Rand and then Branden and then study how children are treated now both at home and in school (look at the term “free-range children” for instance), the rise of childhood obesity because of lack of exercise, children no longer allowed to walk to school and the demise of gym and unsupervised or structured “play”, the influence schemes instituted by bureacrats in France and other European and/or socialist states, schemes designed to “mold the youth” (hey, Bill Ayers went into education, didn’t he?),many other factors as well not mentioned here by me — and you could write a timely, extremely interesting and important book.
Hmm.
The only things that come close to the rising feeling of unease are the preschool rape panic of the 90s and Mao’s Cultural Revolution.
Okay…maybe McCarthyism and the Inquisition too.
It’s really starting to get crazy out there. Soon, we’ll be having riots and shootings on campus like Kent State.
The similarity to the Chinese Cultural Revolution is significant, because it requires the confluence of state power AND action by “radicals.” The state refuses to hold the radicals accountable and the radicals perform extra-legal violence against enemies of the ruling party.
The question is how long can we continue like this? The crazy gets crazier and louder. It’s like a feedback loop.
Anna: there is a fundamental difference between the male anti-female stuff currently and the “feminist” male-bashing. The “men’s rights” or “masculinist” material is specifically and explicitly a _reaction_ to the feminists.
Men are getting tired of being demonized. Of being legally punished for imaginary sins. Of being lectured and bullied and screamed at and blamed and whined at. Of being driven to suicide at four times the rate of women, of dying on the job five times as often as women, of being medicated in school and arrested for how they sit and then told to “man up” and stop complaining.
I expect we’ll see a rise in lone wolf violence like Elliot Rogers, a continuing drop in the marriage rate, and a general tuning-out by men.
The men’s rights crowd are at least still trying to push back, still trying to remain part of society, still trying to save something. The ones you should really worry about are the ones you don’t see, who are just shrugging and walking away. Satisfying their libidos with porn, spending their time playing games, numbing themselves with booze and weed.
Our civilization won’t last long that way. You can see it already in Japan and Europe. When your daughters or grand-daughters dare not go outside without a headscarf or a burqa for fear of being beaten and raped by Muslim immigrant gangs, who will you blame then? What white Christian men will you find to blame? Or will you finally look in the damned mirror and realize what women have done to the world?
You can see it already in Japan and Europe.
Japan doesn’t allow immigration in like Europe, Australia, Canada, and the US.
Most of what people hear about Japan is the media translating things for the sheep to hear about. It’s not something that came down from personal judgment or research.
Trimegistus Says:
June 5th, 2015 at 3:55 pm
Men are getting tired of being demonized.
Once half way decent SexBots appear, all bets are off.
Amusing prospect.
I am G6loq.
If sexbots become popular, the human race will end.
There is a lot of suffering in both genders in the current mating market.
Someone in an aviation magazine remarked that “if you do anything with your airplane that is not consistent with the Pilot’s Operating Handbook, then you are a test pilot.” In a society, the POH is the set of mutually-understood rules, expectations, and customs that guide behavior.
There is no question that our societal POH needed to be revised with the introduction of contraceptive and other technological changes. But too many academics, journalists, and “activists” decided to throw out the whole thing and write their own, ignoring accumulated knowledge and experience, and (to continue the aviation metaphor) not bothering to conduct any wind-tunnel or flight testing of their own or any study of the aircraft systems. They then advertise their POH as the one and only true and valuable one.
The population of people who would make reasonably good pilots is a lot larger than the population of people who would be superb test pilots, or who could recover in time from an erroneously-written POH.
People underestimate the Left when they go to the extent of portraying the Left’s WMD R and D work as being a denial of accumulated human history and wisdom.
But too many academics, journalists, and “activists” decided to throw out the whole thing and write their own, ignoring accumulated knowledge and experience, and (to continue the aviation metaphor) not bothering to conduct any wind-tunnel or flight testing of their own or any study of the aircraft systems.
Are people expecting the masses to think that the 1980s psychological testing of brainwashing and memory implantation in subjects, were not a flight test but something horribly incompetent? Is that what people are thinking.
The ethics had to be thrown out, but the power of the knowledge was not destroyed, it was integrated into the Left’s WMD processes.
Pingback:Chicago Boyz » Blog Archive » The Attrition Mill Speeds Up