Survival Skills

this bozo is running for president.
It’s in pious drag, but I think it’s actually a kind of psychological abuse.

Gaslighting.
Well, yes, pretty much.

Hot take detected
Single women love cats because deep down they miss submitting to strong, confident men who expect to be fed on time and don’t care about their feelings.

Yes, we must restructure society because some entitled princess doesn’t want to clean the bathroom.

Tim Newman discovers more feminism that sounds an awful lot like narcissism.

Tim Newman discovers more feminism that sounds an awful lot like narcissism.
I have noticed that theme of “unpaid work” (along with “emotional labor” and similar, narcissistic concepts) come up more and more frequently.
My question is: Do feminists and SJWs truly believe that there can or should be absolutely no expenditure of even the slightest physical or mental exertion for which there is no monetary remuneration?
Does the mere fact that your heart beats (which does require physical effort) mean that some form of payment of such effort is required?
Oh, wait. I think I just answered my own question.

I have noticed that theme of “unpaid work” (along with “emotional labor” and similar, narcissistic concepts) come up more and more frequently.
Judging by almost any of the feminist articles and publications featured here over the years, you might reasonably deduce that feminist is a synonym for woman who is outraged by the belated realisation that her choices, and vanities, have obvious and insufficiently flattering consequences.
I mean, it would cover the bulk of it.

You know, these feminists must have escaped from sitcoms. Their view of humanity is the stereotypes of a 24-minute TV show. My dad, born 1927, did plenty of cleaning, mainly because Mom, born 1929, couldn’t meet his finicky Pennsylvania Dutch standards, and also because they both worked.

Dumb bint detected.
Fat girl with dyed hair and user icon tailored to disguise corpulence overreaches in announcement of enwokened status.
Hubbard, who is the daughter of cereal magnate Dick Hubbard…
Male who was raised without material struggle seeks display of obstacles overcome the laziest way.
Gaslighting
How many fingers are they holding up?
Answer: However many they want you to say.

One does not read New Yorker ‘humor’ to be amused but rather to be validated.

Burge’s Law: Every New Yorker cartoon can be improved by recaptioning “I think I’m going to kill myself” — David Burge (@iowahawkblog) March 23, 2014

One does not read New Yorker ‘humor’ to be amused but rather to be validated.
Strange case of a magazine that was started by a whole group of geniuses – Thurber, E.B. White, Dorothy Parker, S. J. Perelman – whose style was so idiosyncratic that all the latter generation can do is write pale imitations thereof.
But then, often there’s nothing a comedy audience likes better than having their own views affirmed. There’s a reason almost the entire comedy scene is stultifyingly progressive: it’s so much easier for a stand-up to coast on the laughs of an audience that is comfortable and unchallenged.

You knew it was coming 
It done been here already.

How spiritually bereft, how morally twisted, does a person have to be to boo the moon landing? It was fair enough for liberals to make the Apollo program a rhetorical foil for more welfare spending. Hubert Humphrey did that. So did Ed Koch, then in Congress, who explained, “I cannot justify approving moneys to find out whether or not there is some microbe on Mars when in fact I know there are rats in Harlem apartments.” But at the sacred moment Neil Armstrong stepped onto the Sea of Tranquility, with the aspirations of mankind resting on his shoulders and the dying cries of Gus Grissom and the other casualties of the Apollo program ringing in his ears, what kind of monster would interrupt with a boo?
The audience at the Harlem Cultural Festival, apparently. The crowd of fifty thousand that had gathered in Marcus Garvey Park to hear Stevie Wonder and Gladys Knight jeered when the lunar touchdown was announced. They were not alone. In the fraught ’60s, the space program irritated many radicals, including feminists, environmentalists, and peace campaigners, for reasons that went beyond its extravagant price tag, and involved its deeper, more symbolic meaning. This hostility is the subject of Neil M. Maher’s Apollo in the Age of Aquarius.
Maher offers no unifying thesis, but the thread running through his book is the sheer irrationality of left-wing opposition to the space program. A better word might be subrationality. . . .

How spiritually bereft, how morally twisted, does a person have to be to boo the moon landing?
How rhetorically preposterous does a boomer have to be to make national Sixties dick-waving the ne plus ultra of western civilization? While otherwise largely misidentifying it, of course.
Tribalism is the most basic psychological drive of all
Do tell, physician.
NASA stopped sending people into space in 2011, yet you can buy organic yogurt at every supermarket.
She clanged, self-evidently. Oh the humanity.

The female of the species is more deadly than the male.
I’ve always wondered just what Kipling was thinking with that line. In a one-on-one conflict between a man and a woman, the man will win and the woman will lose and probably die, in almost every such conflict. How “more deadly” then?
More vicious, more spiteful, more manipulative…these I can see. But more deadly? That adjective requires some support. Unless he was just sucking up to the proto-Feminists of his age, or being all “chivalric” and boosting the pedestalization of women without actually believing what he was saying.

I’ve always wondered just what Kipling was thinking with that line.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Female_of_the_Species_(poem)