A Peep Hole Into Bedlam

If it looks like a cult and sounds like a cult…
With all the circular arguments and endless begged questions, it does have a cultish air. And Ms Kim’s reference to “gaslighting” was darkly comical, given that her own enterprise, her entire career, is premised on inculcating pretentious collective guilt and pernicious and stupefying distortions, all to be repeated by devotees, despite their being incoherent and based on sweet bugger all.
But hey, rule #1. Lefties project.

Perhaps she’s underestimated the level of the toxicity she decries.
Or the level of toxicity she deserves.

It’s like a seminar for UFO nuts.

I think she believes it.

A blogger I read had a go at the latest Everyday Feminism by doing exactly one thing: find/replacing “men”/”man” with “Irish”:
”
Dear Well-Meaning Irish Who Believe Themselves to Be Safe, Thereby Legitimizing the “Not All Irish” Argument,
Let’s start here, even though this should go without saying: We don’t think that all Irish are inherently abusive or dangerous. Plenty of Irish aren’t.
There are Irish that we love very much – Irish around whom we feel mostly safe and unthreatened; Irish who, in fact, support, respect, and take care of us on familial, platonic, romantic, and sexual levels. Not every Irish has violated us individually; for most of us, there are plenty of Irish that we trust.
We know what you mean by “not all Irish” – because on a basic level, we agree with you.
But the socialization of Irish is such that even a good Irish – a supportive Irish, a respectful Irish, a trusted Irish – has within him the potential for violence and harm because these behaviors are normalized through patriarchy.
And as such, we know that even the Irish that we love, never mind random Irish who we don’t know, have the potential to be dangerous. Surely, all people have that potential. But in a world divided into the oppressed and the oppressors, the former learn to fear the latter as a defense mechanism.
So when you enter a space – any space – as a Irish, you carry with yourself the threat of harm.
Of course, in most cases, it’s not a conscious thing. We don’t think that most Irish move through the world thinking about how they can hurt us. We don’t believe The Patriarchy™ to be a boardroom full of Irish posing the question “How can we fuck over gender minorities today?” You would be hard-pressed to find a feminist who actively believes that.
But what makes (yes) all Irish potentially unsafe – what makes (yes) all Irish suspect in the eyes of feminism – is the normalized violating behaviors that they’ve learned, which they then perform uncritically.
Make no mistake: When you use the phrase “not all Irish” – or otherwise buy into the myth of it – you’re giving yourself and others a pass to continue performing the socially sanctioned violence of “masculinity” without consequence, whether or not that’s your intention.
In truth, the only thing approaching defiance against this kind of violence is to constantly check and question your own learned entitlement – and that of other Irish. But you can’t do that if you’re stuck in the space of believing that “not all Irish” is a valid argument.
So we wanted to call you in, well-meaning Irish, to talk about these four points that you’re missing when you claim “not all Irish” as a way to eschew responsibility for patriarchal oppression.
Because it is all Irish, actually. And here’s why.”

replacing “men”/“man” with “Irish”
Heh. See also here.

I think a more effective version would be to make it about Muslims. Replace Patriarchy with Islamism, for example. Then send this version to Everyday Feminism and watch as they call you a racist, before the reveal. I’d be amused to see how they react, if they don’t just ignore and block you. While it’s possible that they might wise up to your trap and just flat out ignore it, I don’t think they’d be both self-aware enough to realize it, and willing to not say why you’re a racist but they’re not sexist. Heck, I’d be surprised if the author finds that guys post and didn’t respond to it without making any changes.
Also, didn’t know Mr Welch was still around. Also didn’t know that Livejournal was still around…

How to commemorate MLK
If you think of it as a pretext to indulge in petty malice – in this case, not tipping white waitresses – it makes a kind of sense.

Sporkatus, am I just missing the link to the blog you’re referencing? I don’t see it in either of your posts. In the meantime, I’ll just google some of the text.

Thanks.

send this version to Everyday Feminism and watch as they call you a racist, before the reveal.
Even after the reveal, the Properly Indoctrinated will say that OF COURSE it’s true with ‘men’ and not with ‘Irish,’ for the simple reason that the Irish are not in power and men totally ARE.
Reciprocity is NOT on the agenda, comrade.

Also Russian Hackers: Sines314 comments on Sporkatus’ referenced blog post excerpt before source of excerpt is known!

“You may feel a strong urge to bite down on your own neck” More to chew off the arm that controls the mouse.

David – this may be worth your attention. Just a bit beyond parody:
https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2017/01/16/anthropology-groups-organize-foucault-read-inauguration-day
Apologies if anyone’s posted it and I missed it.

She labors under the brand new and sweetly idiotic idea that women are a minority. In fact without “gender minority” as a flash point she drops precious victim points that a circus like Everyday Feminism can ill afford to lose. Here another shining example of depression and misery attaching itself to the vagina.
Men evolved to see themselves as individuals- the feminist claim that women have not, and indeed cannot see themselves outside the collective of womanhood is sexist, dangerous infantalism.

Wait. Mr. Welch is real?!
Now I feel a bit like I did when my daughter called after her first week at MIT to tell me that she had square-danced with Guy Steele (a person I always regarded as semi-mythical).

@dicentra
I’ve seen all three in person. They’re real and they’re magnificent.

We also learn… that simply being white makes one “complicit with racism.”
Logic is hard.

If it looks like a cult and sounds like a cult…
Typo?

Instead, we get what’s almost a series of buzzwords and incantations –
Which make perfect sense inside her head. Much of modern philosophy, as taught in academia, works this way. When you try to break it down you find there’s nothing there.

We also learn… that simply being white makes one “complicit with racism.”
What I have never seen is what actually defines “white” to these knucleheads.
Here in the US and A there are a remarkable number of mutts. I know of a brother and sister, who had a black mother and white father who grew up in a predominantly black area of a large city. The brother looked remarkably like Jimi Hendrix, and the sister, aside from dark hair and eyes, wouldn’t be out of place at a KKK convention.
Is the sister “complicit with racism” and the brother not because of their respective phenotypes ? Are neither because of their genotype ? If the latter, are the SJWs going to institute DNA testing and bring back the “one drop rule” ? If they do, how do they tell who is what, because one can’t tell just by looking. Perhaps we can corner the market on name tags that list pronouns and percentage “color”, that way no one will be triggered by being accused of complicit raycisssism, or perhaps only, say, 75% complicit raycissism.

@Daniel Ream: I think he actually did get CON! made, and went on to sell copies at conventions and maybe even went on to CON! 2. You might be able to harass him for a copy.
@Spiny Norman: Oddly enough, Mr. Welch has met Skippy.

One of the excuses for antisemitism was (and remains) the proposal that Jews were oppressing others by controlling money and governments.
This new bigotry against whites is just a variant of that theme.