Friday Ephemera

The problem, to my mind, with the word “bitch” is that a) it doesn’t really mean an awful lot and b) it sounds angry to the point of bitter.

Well, sometimes one does need to express bitterness succinctly.
I would rarely, if ever, use the word “bitch” to describe someone. But the word “bitchy” is a very useful way of expressing a fairly common behaviour, and I would use it equally for men and women. “Resting bitch face” has its uses too.
Are we still allowed to use it for: “A person in a subservient sexual role, especially an incarcerated male who provides sex to another male under threat of violence or in exchange for protection”? Because in that sense the word is traditionally used of men.

It’s as if those “fight racism” SJWs actually want non-racist wypeepo to be racist.
Historically, encouraging all white people to think of themselves as an ideologically unified bloc hasn’t worked out well.

It’s as if those “fight racism” SJWs actually want non-racist wypeepo to be racist.
Historically, encouraging all white people to think of themselves as an ideologically unified bloc hasn’t worked out well.
The Dems in the US are explicitly anti-white; I wonder how long even the most woke whites might take to realise this isnt going to work out well for them.
Also see the Noticer on Telegram to see who’s pushing this philosophy.

Will this close the italics in the earlier comments?

Uh-oh. Sumbuddy’s in twubbol…

Yeppers. All clear.

Plan B, since you ask, involves forehead tattoos.

Funny thing … in the late 1960’s, at least in So Cal, the word bitchin meant something was just the coolest thing EVAH!
If George Lucas is accurate about his period slang, and why wouldn’t he be, it’s what teenage girls were saying in Modesto CA in 1962 – “Wow, that’s bitchin’ tuck-and-roll”, “Hey, you got a bitchin’ car”.
http://www.unz.com/anepigone/islam-is-right-about-women/

The reporter and those he talks to are unsure who the fliers “target”. So completely does Wokeism forbid intellectual curiosity of any kind that the simple message could be making a statement intended to provoke those reading it into ponderment cannot be given any consideration. The women interviewed are merely unsure of whom the Who? is and who the Whom? is (*), and so are uncertain of how to react. Their consternation is our amusement.

(*) One news channel is framing it as “controversial signs are showing up in Winchester about Muslim women…”.

So completely does Wokeism forbid intellectual curiosity of any kind…
Heh. It does reveal the cognitive dissonance quite neatly. There’s an economy, a kind of elegance.

Now, that “judge by character not by skin” ethos is dismissed as “racist” itself.
And that’s becauss it turned out not to be useful to the race hustlers in dividing up the herd.

My second, successful attempt
Actually, it wasn’t. The whole place was still italics before I posted.

Actually, it wasn’t. The whole place was still italics before I posted.
! So exactly what did you do to fix it? Viewing the page source, it appears that you typed the following. Is that correct?
[i][/i][/i]Uh-oh. Sumbuddy’s in twubbol…[/i]
(Replace every [ and ] with left and right angle brackets.)
I’d swear that what I did worked once before, so is there anything edifying that we should know?

This.

This
Remember “food deserts”, the Left’s ploy to get an army of government apparatchiks into the retail food business?

I left Instagram and said why. I didn’t feel safe. Hatred and chaos were reigning supreme. Gossip was spreading like wildfire. I didn’t want to be a part of it…
Come now, surely that’s an exag
A few activists were frantically going around hunting down my followers or anyone who had designed a pattern in my yarn. They told them to unfollow me and remove my name from their patterns…or else!
F%(%^^(ing hell.

F%(%^^(ing hell.
As noted previously,

One small mercy is that the more unlikely the context – in this case, the world of knitting – the more obviously contrived and dysfunctional the woke-lings seem. This doesn’t appear to inhibit them, of course – they seem quite shameless – but it does make their behaviour, and motives, easier to spot…
Viewed objectively, there isn’t anything to be offended by. Ms Templer describes her excitement and says that for her, a young woman with little experience of global travel, the opportunity to fly halfway around the planet is “like being offered a seat on a flight to Mars.” That’s it. But for those inclined to recreational grievance-seeking, that’s the appeal. The less basis there is for indignation, the more pleasurable the scolding becomes. It’s a twisted power dynamic, a form of gaslighting. And for a certain kind of person, making someone anxious and confused, and then making them prostrate themselves in public – when there’s no reason to do so – is the sweetest triumph. It’s a game for budding sociopaths.

You’d think some parents might object to what their children are being turned into. At considerable expense.

Yes, this is a conference but my safe space badge says I don’t want to talk to you.
Formalised neuroticism, the signature of the woke world.

Islam is right about women
What did we see in those news reports – women demanding that the police protect them from words on a piece of paper, women expressing their boredom and confusion at having to think about difficult ideas, women unwilling to accept the existence of intractable conflicts that can’t be solved by being nice, women wishing that everyone could just accept the multikulti future our betters have planned for us.
Those kinds of women are drawn to Islam, to the idea that women need the protection of assertive, authoritative men so that they can live out their gifts of nurturance and modesty in a safe space that’s protected from the rough public sphere. They’re seeing something about themselves that goes against their feminist indoctrination, so there’s a bit of confusion. But that confusion can be made to go away by binge-watching Handmaid’s Tale.
in the absence of mass immigration, “Islam is right about women” is a fun ideological koan. But feminism is no real competition for Islam. Islam wins in the long term because its women are having babies and its men are willing to stand up for their beliefs.
It’s a hate crime for us to express our objection to Islam in terms of we live here, our ancestors lived here, our culture and society is intertwined with Christianity, church steeples belong in our cityscapes in a way that minarets don’t. It’s not yet a hate crime to express concerns about Islam’s treatment of women. So that’s where the ideological battle is fought, and will be lost, because women don’t find Islam as objectionable as all that.

because women don’t find Islam as objectionable as all that.
Come on now! Most women find Islam quite objectionable in regard to its treatment of women, including many that have been born into it. Women don’t have the power in many Islamic countries to do anything much about their status, but that’s largely because of concerted action by the powers that be to prevent them.
The non-authoritarian Islamic countries aren’t much worse in the treatment of women than a whole pile of non-Islamic countries. The difference in the way women are treated in Georgia and Azerbaijan, for instance, shows that culture and history over-rides religion. Arab countries tend to treat women very badly, but not all Moslems are Arab.
Most people are happy to let other people live their lives any way they want (provided it doesn’t impinge on them directly). That’s quite different from women — or men for that matter — finding the treatment of Islamic women as acceptable.
Maybe you know different types of people, but all the women I know would be horrified if it was suggested that they had any sort of hankering to be treated like a Saudi woman.