Elsewhere (232)
Ian Tuttle on leftism and thuggery:
It is clear that, for Antifa, the purpose [of their language] is to cloak reality. Antifa’s reason for describing something or someone as “fascist” is not that it is actually fascist… but that describing it that way is politically advantageous. Likewise with any number of other slurs. Antifa are in effect claiming to oppose everything that is bad — and, of course, it is Antifa who decide what is bad. Hence the organisers of the Inauguration Day protests could write, as their mission statement, that “#DisruptJ20 rejects all forms of domination and oppression.” That is a good monopoly if you can get it… They are, in the final analysis, simply claiming that people who think like them should be exempt from the law’s constraints, and that people who do not think like them should not receive the law’s protections.
When your political worldview is premised on the coercion of others, and on pathological self-flattery, it’s not too much of a stretch.
Heather Mac Donald on a real “rape culture” that’s oddly unacknowledged by campus feminists:
In March, a 15-year-old girl in Chicago was lured into a basement and gang-raped by five to six males. The girl was threatened with a pit bull if she tried to flee… One of the participants live-streamed the rape on Facebook. So far, two boys, 15- and 14-years-old, have been arrested for the attack… Up to 40 people watched the rape live; none reported it to the police or to Facebook. Since then, threats, taunts, social-media bullying, and physical assaults have been directed at… the victim and her family, not at the rapists. A group of girls beat the victim’s twelve-year-old sister last week, reports DNA Info Chicago. One of the girl’s attackers said: “Why [did] you send my brother to jail,” according to her mother. You want to see an example of “blaming the victim?” This is it.
Tim Newman on attempts to glamorise polyamory:
Ah, this old chestnut: ‘traditional marriages often fail so polyamorous ones are worth considering.’ What nobody ever does is closely examine the rate at which polyamorous relationships fail, the mental state of the people involved in them, and the effect on any children unfortunate enough to be caught up in them.
Related, in two contrasting parts, the views of Laurie Penny and Brad Wilcox, only one of whom uses data.
And Dominic Mancini on a grave threat to the wellbeing of minority students at the University of Michigan:
Anna Wibbelman, former president of Building a Better Michigan, an organisation that voices student concerns about university development, stated at a student government meeting in late March that “minority students felt marginalised by quiet, imposing, masculine [wood] panelling” found throughout the 100-year-old building, the meeting’s minutes state.
As usual, feel free to share your own links and snippets, on any subject, in the comments.
They are, in the final analysis, simply claiming that people who think like them should be exempt from the law’s constraints, and that people who do not think like them should not receive the law’s protections.
“Tennessee Rep. David Kustoff voted for the Republican bill that would repeal and replace Obamacare, known as the American Health Care Act. A woman allegedly tried to run his car off the road because of that vote. She has been charged with “felony reckless endangerment,””
https://www.thecollegefix.com/post/32584/
When your political worldview is premised on the coercion of others, and on pathological self-flattery, it’s not too much of a stretch.
That link.
That link.
Yes, it’s still rather strange to watch people who in public feign pious compassion and chant “No hate, no fear,” and then in private excitedly discuss throat punching and boast of plans to burn down the homes of people who disagree with them. As I said in the comments, you have to wonder what it’s like to be a run-of-the-mill lefty poseur who flirts with such ‘activism’ and then slowly but vividly realises that he or she is in a room with a high concentration of people with quite worrying personality disorders.
“in a room with a high concentration of people with quite worrying personality disorders.”
It’s both poignant and disturbing to imagine these people seeking the company of others twisted and bent like themselves.
It’s both poignant and disturbing to imagine these people seeking the company of others twisted and bent like themselves.
And yet evidently they do attract others, especially among students, not all of whom can be deranged, at least not initially. Which, again, makes me wonder what it’s like to be a run-of-the-mill ‘progressive’ who rails against whatever, if only because it’s fashionable, and doesn’t usually endorse arson, vandalism and thuggery, but who associates with people who do – and who in fact exult in sociopathic behaviour. At what point, I wonder, are the normal inhibitions outweighed by the titillation, the sense of power?
“minority students felt marginalised by quiet, imposing, masculine [wood] panelling” found throughout the 100-year-old building,
And the wallpaper hurt my feelings!
Regarding the Laurie Penny link above, this seems related.
It is clear that, for Antifa, the purpose [of their language] is to cloak reality.
I’m not sure how many of the hangers-really understand that they are merely camouflaging the pursuit of raw power with the language of “morality.” As it happens, this past weekend I became involved in a dust-up with a relative who’d posted a meme on social media decrying the provision of medical services for a “profit” as “immoral.” I normally ignore such things, but the pronouncement intrigued me, as the poster has a child who runs a very successful private medical practice.
What was astounding was his inability to see that a) human institutions cannot be divorced from the actual humans who create them, work within them and benefit from them. Thus, if the health care “system” in the U.S. is “immoral,” those within it are immoral as well. Second, he could see the troubling implications of his unilateral declaration of iniquity for something which is otherwise perfectly legal and beneficial to all concerned from the patients to the provider’s employees to–yes–the provider himself. Without reciting the whole exchange, the bottom line is that for each objection or problem associated with his position, each bit of data which rebutted his assertions, he retreated further in the realms of fantasy to justify his belief that stuff which he deems important should appear in unlimited, state-of-the art, no cost quantities by simple fiat. And this from someone who I perceived to be of above average intelligence.
Sadly, I don’t think he’s alone in his beliefs, and that’s the truly scary part.
“minority students felt marginalised by quiet, imposing, masculine [wood] panelling”
Odd that “minority students” who in the native lands of their ancestors would be living in wattle huts and other wood based structures, would be put off by wood, which is, of course, an organic and sustainable product which should make them feel all green and fuzzy. Mere drywall walls are, after all, an invention, and part of the culture, of white cracker colonialists.
https://www.thecollegefix.com/post/32593/
wanted students to remember their commencement “positively for years to come,” and that couldn’t happen if a white conservative politician was their speaker.
This is almost funny:
I suppose the advantage is that, if you don’t allow your political opponents to speak, even at a commencement ceremony, then your caricature of them and what they supposedly represent is much less likely to be challenged.
And I see that the university in question isn’t exactly known for its quality student intake and academic standing:
Oh dear.
Which, again, makes me wonder what it’s like to be a run-of-the-mill ‘progressive’ who rails against whatever, if only because it’s fashionable, and doesn’t usually endorse arson, vandalism and thuggery, but who associates with people who do – and who in fact exult in sociopathic behaviour.
Sounds like a promising scenario for a horror movie
Which, again, makes me wonder what it’s like to be a run-of-the-mill ‘progressive’ who rails against whatever, if only because it’s fashionable, and doesn’t usually endorse arson, vandalism and thuggery, but who associates with people who do – and who in fact exult in sociopathic behaviour.
They may not even associate with such people. What they do, however, is appropriate the language of the psychopaths of good versus evil–“evil” being defined by by their personal declaration in their fashionable denunciations. It’s all so easy in the abstract, when one is writing earnest letters to the editor at The New York Times from the library in one’s Greenwich Village brownstone decrying the outrage du jour using language better suited to a Jonathan Edwards sermon, insulated as one is from culpability while others do the wielding of bike locks and tossing of Molotov cocktails.
Wibbelman. Anyone for nominative determinism?
Laurie Penny and Brad Wilcox, only one of whom uses data.
*shocked face*
*shocked face*
In fairness, when not using the article to tell us, at length, about her fascinating self and her fascinating radicalism, Laurie does in fact deploy one statistic. Though the one she picks – regarding the correlation of poverty, state dependency and single motherhood – rather undermines her own position, and in particular her disdain for the conventional family unit. However, this detail seems to escape her attention.
However, this detail seems to escape her attention.
She’s not used to facts.
Dion J Pierre on Black Lives Matter.
“‘[M]inority students felt marginalised by quiet, imposing, masculine [wood] panelling’ found throughout the 100-year-old building…”
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha…
Oh man, I’m laughing so hard I’m in tears!
You couldn’t make this up.
“minority students felt marginalised by quiet, imposing, masculine [wood] panelling”
Yeah? Well, I feel “marginalized” by “friendly”, informal, modern architecture. But that’s okay because some of my ancestors may possibly have been rich landowners, maybe with slaves. It’s highly unlikely, since most of them seem to have been farm labourers scratching a living around the middle third of the British Isles who could only dream of a high-school education let alone university, but hey… my skin is the same colour as Robert E. Lee’s and Cecil Rhodes’s, so I must atone for their sins.
attempts to glamorise polyamory
Does ‘polyamory’ count as greed or selfishness?
Does ‘polyamory’ count as greed or selfishness?
When interviewed, devotees often show more self-preoccupation than is generally thought attractive. And if such people are also parents, and prioritising a taste for sexual adventurism above the domestic stability and wellbeing of their children, I’d say selfishness, certainly.
Anna Wibbelman … stated at a student government meeting in late March tha “minority students felt marginalised by quiet, imposing, masculine [wood] panelling” found throughout the 100-year-old building…
I would assume Ms Wibbelman thinks they’d feel more comfortable with concrete block walls painted Institutional Green, a color chosen for government buildings like public schools, mental health facilities – and jails – because of its alleged “calming effect” on the occupants (students, inmates).
this seems related
Well, after spending the past few generations relentlessly squashing “masculinity” out of men, what the hell did they expect?
When your political worldview is premised on . . . . on pathological self-flattery, it’s not too much of a stretch.
Copying from commentary elsewhere: There is certainly the basic awareness that hipster = fail, and then someone in that discussion elsewhere was again trying to figure out how to describe the current recurring debacle in hair that hipsters have been inflicting on themselves.
“minority students felt marginalised by quiet, imposing, masculine [wood] panelling”
Perhaps feeling instinctively that a narcissistic temper-tantrum might lead to a higher repair bill than usual. Which in turn might lead to…consequences?
“minority students felt marginalised by quiet, imposing, masculine [wood] panelling” found throughout the 100-year-old building,
And the wallpaper hurt my feelings!
Heather Mac Donald on a real “rape culture” that’s oddly unacknowledged by campus feminists:
Sadly, I don’t think he’s alone in his beliefs, and that’s the truly scary part.
Welcome to Canada.
“minority students felt marginalised by quiet, imposing, masculine [wood] panelling”
In other words, they hate white people and Europe civilization, and so are always looking for things to object to.
“more comfortable with concrete block walls”
Hmmm… could these walls be padded in some way, so as to avoid injury to the
crazy personpatientoccupantstudent?“Childish men are to blame for women having kids late in life”
Any mention of childish women?
Welcome to Canada.
Some years ago, I had the occasion to drive west across the Great Plains on U.S. Route 2 from Western Minnesota across North Dakota and Montana to Idaho. The highway is known locally as the “High Line” because it runs on average twenty miles south of the Canadian border. Every thirty miles or so, there’s a town, usually the county seat. What struck me about the drive was that in each of these little towns at the intersection with a road or highway heading north, there was some sort of medical care provider: a diagnostic lab, urgent care, or medically imaging center. Invariably there would be flags out front including a big red and white maple leaf with a sign saying “Welcome Canadians!” Evidently, our northern cousins preferred to come to Havre, Montana to get their MRIs, CT scans, X-Rays, etc. because the didn’t have to wait months and could take the films and test results with them back home. I also saw several out-patient surgery centers with similar marketing efforts. Most of the towns where these things were located were pretty small and absent medical tourists wouldn’t support those sorts services. In a sense, it was a win-win for everybody. Canadians got fast treatment for cash and the locals got access to medical care they would otherwise have to drive two or three hours to get.
“Which, again, makes me wonder what it’s like to be a run-of-the-mill ‘progressive’ who rails against whatever, if only because it’s fashionable, and doesn’t usually endorse arson, vandalism and thuggery, but who associates with people who do – and who in fact exult in sociopathic behaviour.
Sounds like a promising scenario for a horror movie.”
I think I am one of the older readers here.
In the US, last time around resulted in the Manson Family, the Weathermen, Kent State, the Symbionese Liberation Army, and no doubt others of whom I did not hear.
In the UK, there were those who approved of those developments, which gave me a clue that mixing with Lefties did not make sense.
Some years ago, I had the occasion to drive west across the Great Plains on U.S. Route 2 from Western Minnesota across North Dakota and Montana to Idaho.
Out West, the locals generally have enough sense to realize socialized medicine is a trap; living five hours drive from anything will do that to you. Unfortunately, there aren’t enough of them to matter electorally. In the cities, where all the population is, the attitude that socialized medicine is not merely a right but a National Treasure that must be protected at all costs from, say, doctors wanting to exchange their services for money with private citizens is nigh universal. Regardless of the body count that results.
Tim Newman on attempts to glamorise polyamory:
OTOH, there is sologomy wherein one marries one’s self, which would seem to be setting a new bar for narcissism.
However, as leftists can’t seem to be able to muster up any consistency, one Miss (Mrs ?) Anderson who married herself, “…just celebrated her one-year anniversary with a solo trip to Mexico. She said even though she’s married to herself, she’s dating and open to marrying another person.”
So I guess she is an adulterer then ? Maybe just a swinger ? Does she have to divorce herself to marry someone else, or would that just more polyamory ?
Thats quite a story, Muldoon. Sure, SHE is open about possibly marrying another person, but has she sat down to discuss it with that other part of herself she married, only a year ago? Or is this all going to be major shock to, er, a part of her?? Why not try to talk with yourself first, sort out whatever problems you are having with yourself after 1yr of wedded bliss, before you actually consider stepping out and having some sort of illicit indecent affair with an actual other person?
Sure, maybe the thrill you first saw in yourself is gone. But i say to her: dont give up on yourself. Please.
Study at Hopp Singg Academy. Unlike other institutions of higher education, we make sure the uselessness of our courses is apparent to, at minimum, 95% of our students, who can then get smart and get out before they find themselves trapped by incessant debt and lack of skills.
Hopp Singg Academy. Come see the light.
…sort out whatever problems you are having with yourself…
It may be all be too much; all the little things, you come home from a hard day, and you find dirty dishes in the sink, you find out you ate all the ice cream and left an empty carton in the fridge, you are always leaving your hose hanging in the shower, you forget your birthday, the fights over what to watch on TV. Then the big things that didn’t look like your lipstick on your collar, who were you really talking to on the phone and why did you go into the other room, sure you told yourself you were working late, but where were you ? The suspicion, always the suspicion, can you really trust yourself ?
Then the divorce, will you get a good settlement, is your lawyer better than yours ?
A cautionary tale for all, there is just no good to come from stepping out on yourself.
Jeepers, those 21st century polyamorists sound like a bunch of arseholes.
there is sologomy wherein one marries one’s self, which would seem to be setting a new bar for narcissism.
Not as much as you might think. It’s nothing more than thirty-something spinsters who have realized they’ve screwed up their lives permanently engaging in the princess wedding fantasy they’ve had since they were eight. It’s not about the marriage, it’s about having a “special day”.
thirty-something spinsters… engaging in the princess wedding fantasy they’ve had since they were eight
Something tells me that last sentence isn’t entirely true.
Christina Hoff Sommers.
And in the eternally joyous world of right-on “social justice” publications…
The author of the piece, Rihanna Martin, “enjoys… educating people.”
As one commenter notes,
It’s the hot and sexy way to signal in-group piety.
I went down the rabbit hole a bit and followed the polyamory posts on the ‘Desert Sun’ blog (good site!) Then I came up against this Pennyism:
“But far more of my polyamorous life involves making tea and talking sensibly about boundaries, safe sex and whose turn it is to do the washing-up.”
When you’re in a normal* two-person relationship you only have to have most of these conversations once. (Except the last one, which I spend most of my life avoiding). It takes Penny’s special genius to actually try and sell endlessly talking about ‘boundaries and safe sex and washing up’ as an actual benefit of polyamoury.
*Is this a trigger word? Perhaps we should substitute it for something like ‘orthogamous’?
It takes Penny’s special genius to actually try and sell endlessly talking about ‘boundaries and safe sex and washing up’ as an actual benefit of polyamory.
Heh. She does have a knack for giving the impression that she doesn’t actually proof-read anything she writes. It often reads as an avalanche of rhetoric, much of it disjointed or self-refuting. (See, for instance, her struggles with statistics, mentioned upthread.)
At the New York Times: DNA Tests, and Sometimes Surprising Results
Mildly amused by the case of “Bernard” demonstrating the one drop rule in action.
What nobody ever does is closely examine the rate at which polyamorous relationships fail, the mental state of the people involved in them
In a somewhat uncanny coincidence, a trio of polyamorous feminist atheists on Youtube, going by the name of The Skeptic Feminist took a tragic turn at the weekend when the only male member of the group, Aleksandr Kolpakov (known online as ‘Russian Dead Pool’) shot and fatally wounded Heather Anable (whose online name was ‘Poison Ivy’, named after the Batman villainess).
Kolpakov was a US Army veteran and it’s understood that he had been suffering from PTSD.
As with Tim Newman, these were consenting adults and how they chose to organize their domestic affairs was nobody’s business but their own – even so, I find it quite hard to imagine how the particular stresses and strains involved in living in a polyamorous relationship would have been helpful for the stress levels of someone with an already imbalanced mental state.
For instance, I’m not sure how seriously to take this, from Miss Dreadful’s piece on polyamory in the New Statesman:
I live in a commune, I date multiple people … I’ve made the same choice that men my age have been able to make for centuries without being scolded by society … Next week, one of my partners is getting married, and this week I went to his stag night as part of the groom’s party. I’m happy for him, and for his fiancee, whose permission I got before mentioning her in this piece.
Penny has talked widely and often about the delicacy of her own mental state so I feel there’s something more than a little hollow and unconvincing about the eagerness with which she wants to let the reader know how calmly she is taking to this news of the marriage of one of her partners. I can’t help but feel someone – Penny or the former partner’s new spouse – is being slighted.
In a not dissimilar way, here is a short video The Skeptic Feminist made in which the late Miss Anable, with Kolpakov sitting beside her, tries to argue for the virtues of “Committed Polyamory”. And also in a not dissimilar way to Penny, you have to wonder who exactly Anable is trying to convince with her argument – the audience or herself.
I guess no one reads John Updike anymore.
Mildly amused by the case of “Bernard” demonstrating the one drop rule in action.
I believe the phrase is, “Oh do fuck off, you pretentious wanker.”
I find it quite hard to imagine how the particular stresses and strains involved in living in a polyamorous relationship would have been helpful for the stress levels of someone with an already imbalanced mental state.
And yet that dynamic seems awfully common among devotees of unstable multi-partner relationships. Suspiciously so, perhaps.
the late Miss Anable, with Kolpakov sitting beside her, tries to argue for the virtues of “Committed Polyamory”
I think her tone of voice and body language (or tilty head language) tells us most of the story there.