Thanks for your response. It appears that our views overlap to a large degree.

“But my overall point, is that forbearance, tolerance, long-suffering, sympathy, understanding, and self-sacrifice are part of what has gotten us into an almost indefensible position in the first place.”

Sadly true. We have tolerated and even mainstreamed behaviors and identities that used to disqualify people from full participation in public life and the law’s protections. I don’t want to see homosexuals, the gender-confused, and other vulnerable minorities persecuted or treated as outlaws and legitimate targets for socially sanctioned forms of gratuitous cruelty. On the other hand, excessive tolerance and the weakening of societal norms have undermined our civilization and left it to open to conquest by Zaphod’s bioleninist hordes. I think you and I would agree that a restoration of some of the old taboos is long overdue. How we restore them, at this late date, is the problem. I fear that the attempt will be brutal for all concerned.

To reverse Blake’s proverb: Bless Braces, Damn Relaxes.

“Hubert on May 8, 2021 at 10:57 am said:

My point was simple. Jenner is showing good sense and a certain amount of grit in this case. Whatever you think of his/her transformation, that deserves recognition. “

I do not deny that. Even the mentally disturbed can speak the truth on some topics. And to quote a somewhat more esteemed poet than Auden, even, “The devil can cite Scripture for his purpose.” Not that Jenner is the devil, a devil, or even one of the imps.

And, of course, Bruce Jenner was at one time incontestably [pun intended] a man of relentless determination and some grit. That is not the problem. The problem is, what I will call here, “the problem of [ now needing] walls”. Cite the Spartans [or us at one time] and all that jazz. We once were better than that. Better than lotteries, better than listening to mentally ill young females ululate on stage boasting of their mental disorders, better than listening to clowns like Fauci lie to us and then tell us why the lied, and our just accepting it; better than allowing masked crazies wearing black tactical gear to assault people and burn our cities down because neurotic enervated crazies of both sexes, get the vapors just thinking about … not being invited to the prom; hence all life is “inclusion”.

Or as I described it earlier, the underlying problem – is our national social victim charade – which has solidified into the canon that only victims now legitimately have “a voice” – using here the parlance of the communitarian termite-folk.

“As for Grenell–a homosexual with a husband (or, depending on your views, “husband”)–he showed a willingness to take on the IC during his too-brief tenure as DNI. Again, grit. Would that others had shown half as much.”

I did not know who Grenell was 2 years ago. I eventually saw an image of him and read of some point he made. I thought to myself, ‘Makes sense; and heck, he looks a lot like like cousin X !” Or, David Purdue, as I could not decide which, more.

But then I heard Grenell talk. My take is that it is a damn shame. If reconstructed, he’d probably make a good hetero family man in another life.

“Since Auden was referenced as a latter-day Nostradamus upstream in this thread, I thought those stanzas were on-point. “

That occurred to me after I hit “send”

It was mischievous of me to throw them in here, I admit. Won’t do it again.

Don’t stop on account of that fall-out. One of the problems with some conservatives is their stolid clockwork-like predictability.

And yes, I think he was putting his thumb on the scale for the home team.”

At the least. I think he was uh … fabricating.

On the question of courage in combat or SHTF situations generally: we have at least one Vietnam combat veteran on this forum. His opinion would count for something. Mine does not. However, I would cite Hector MacDonald, Siegfried Sassoon, and Wilfred Owen as counter-examples to the pansies-have-no-guts school of thought. I’m sure there are similar and more-recent examples from our own armed services. I’ve known a few combat veterans personally, but mostly from the WWII generation. (One of them, a highly respected university professor who had served as a captain of a heavy weapons company in Europe, was known to be bisexual.) They were as a rule reluctant to discuss their experiences with people who hadn’t been there. I did hear one say that you never know how people will behave in combat until they are in that situation and that you can’t make assumptions based on external characteristics or affect. That seems about right.

I would agree that boxing or wrestling, or the “gridiron”, or hunting don’t tell you what you can inevitably expect from a man under pressure, although they might tell you something about emotional reactions to unexpected or unjustified aggression.

But traditional combat has also required a certain kind of passivity and compliance, or even indifference, which in some situations could look like heroism … whatever that might be. Getting out of the way of a barrage may not be seen as heroic. Firing rifles from behind trees as you target officers, instead of standing in ranks daring the other to mow you down, was certainly not seen as heroism.

I’m not sure I know what heroism is if it takes place when one’s blood is up. But when some petty officer goes down into a flooding engine room, or a fireman goes up the twin towers, then I guess that in those cases I know what it looks like.

But my overall point, is that forbearance, tolerance, long-suffering, sympathy, understanding, and self-sacrifice are part of what has gotten us into an almost indefensible position in the first place. It is a position where we need men who are literally or figuratively castrated to speak up, because now, even our women are attacked as illegitimate.

But, you know, inclusion, and love knows no boundaries, and all that crap.

Anyway, sorry to have stirred things up.

No, no, no, no. I don’t agree with Zaphod on a lot. But what I do agree with him on, is that we need more stirring up, not less.

Which is why I deliberately pushed the limit.

“These are dangerous and uncertain times. My view, for what it’s worth, is that we can use all the allies we can get.”

More’s the pity, as I have been saying.

People are responsible for their own actions and reactions.
And Neo has an edit button.
Don’t pull your punches, but keep the fisticuffs civil on your end, and let responders take the same care of their own replies.

Words are not violence.

“Fair cop.”

“Burn her! Burn her!”

MP&THG

“Plus, Caitlyn came out today in favor of amnesty for illegals, apparently failing to understand one of the underlying causes of California’s problems.”

Oh… It understands all right.

That’s a Witch Burning Offence right there. Game Over.

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2021/05/09/caitlyn-jenner-backs-amnesty-illegal-aliens-absolutely/

Who are currently in power—illegally so—and who have NO INTENTION of relinquishing it BUT every intention of “legalizing” what is blatantly illegal.

Many of these people just happen to be heterosexual. Many of them hide behind their (so-called) religious/moral affiliations.

A few thoughts:
1. Patriots come in all shapes, colors, sizes and creeds, etc. (cf. MLK’s “judge them by the content of their character.”)
2. The perfect is the enemy of the good.
3. People are not always(!) consistent.
4. God works in mysterious ways.
5. Alan Turing (for one—if huge—example).

As Hubert said, “we can use all the allies we can get.”…All the good and/or decent and/or talented and/or dedicated and/or right-minded people.

The country can’t afford to pursue perfection or rely strictly on angels.

Rather, it must rely on “the better angels of our nature”. Of ALL our natures. All of us.

Otherwise, the Manhattan Project to save the country will NOT be able to get off the ground.

FWIW.