Elsewhere (317)
Heather Mac Donald on the feminised university and its pathologies:
Female dominance of the campus population is intimately tied to the rhetoric of unsafety and victimhood. Females on average score higher than males on the personality trait of neuroticism, defined as anxiety, emotional volatility, and susceptibility to depression. (Mentioning this long-accepted psychological fact got James Damore fired from Google.) Victorian neurasthenia has been reborn on campuses today as alleged trauma inflicted by such monuments of Western literature as Ovid’s Metamorphoses. Hearing an argument that chromosomes, not whim, make males male and females female is another source of alleged existential threat.
When students claim to be felled by ideas that they disagree with, the feminised bureaucracy does not tell them to grow up and get a grip. It validates their self-pity… The most far-reaching effects of the feminised university are the intolerance of dissent from political orthodoxy and the attempt to require conformity to that orthodoxy. This intolerance is justified in the name of safety and “inclusivity.”
Christopher Rufo has some related thoughts:
Apparently, the way to entrance others and to suddenly become fascinating is to make yourself your own go-to subject.
And Anna Slatz on “inclusivity” and questionable role models:
Helms once admitted to wearing his mother’s underwear as a youth and stated that he “studied” girls at his school with an obsession that slowly turned to “lust.” While serving with the US Navy during the 1970s, Helms began stealing the undergarments of female neighbours living in his apartment complex in South Carolina after seeing a bra in the washing machine of the laundry room… “As I stood watching the bra swirl around in the dryer, I sensed a growing desire to dress as a woman and to see the hidden woman within me.”
The recap of Mr Helms’ adventures in bra-thievery and fetishistic cross-dressing starts as merely farcical, but it does venture into territory that, shall we say, casts doubt on his selection as an inspirational figure, a person to emulate.
Feel free to share your own links and snippets, on any subject, in the comments.
Odelay and feminization of universities: I believe you are right that feminization is only a piece of the puzzle. I think the bigger problem is capture by deconstructionism (from France) starting back in the 60s by literary criticism and quickly picked up by feminists. By this theory, everything is tainted by power, there is no “truth”, all is merely “discourses” to support the status quo and there is no objective way to decide between discourses (science being merely a discourse). It then merged with marxism (which had heavily influenced the original) and spread to the new “studies” departments and the social sciences. It was very congenial for lazy people or those promoted beyond their IQ because standards of proof and the very idea of rigor were tossed overboard. The more convoluted and tendentious your argument, the better. Judith Butler for example. The Marxism thing makes it all easy–all humans are either oppressors or victims. If you are successful you are evil. See? Easy. Feelings grew in importance. Finding racism/patriarchy/capitalism under every bed was in. But since it is all based on bullshit, the defense response has become shouting down speakers at universities, deplatforming, and censorship. And here we are.
Agreed. And of course cultural problems rarely have simple causes.
Agree. Though as pst also says, there causes are multiple and rarely simple. Sociology and such are obviously not the hard sciences yet conclusions are reached, agreed upon, etc. as if they reached some QED proof level. Yet pointing out the absurdity of this level of acceptance is met with indifference and active, even performative ignorance.
This isn’t a direct follow on but the temptation in the modern sense is to trace these things back to Marx. A friend posted something about Marx recently that got me to thinking. Imagine if Marx, Engles, and their immediate cohorts never existed. This general mentality still existed in society. The French constantly fall for it because it was thick in their revolution. I think there is a danger in attributing too much to these personalities. At base, it’s a envy thing and I wonder if the right would focus more on addressing envy, excessive envy anyway, would not be more productive than the Marx thing. Take the capitalism/proletariat/labor/class factors, all concepts so labeled by Marx, out of the argument and focus more on the root of the problem.
WTP: yes indeed, envy combined with laziness give rise to victim culture etc.–Marx just gives a nice simple rationale for the crazy. I am surrounded by legal immigrants who are willing to work hard and they are successful, happy, and not envious. We have fun. Envy is a terrible drug.
From the Wayback Machine
I think the envy drives some of the laziness. I believe both are heavily driven by hopelessness and ignorance. I truly, truly believe that if the right would just put 10% of the time, money, and effort that they put into politics they instead put into a campaign to help vulnerable people understand that economics is not a zero-sum game that would help tremendously in this regard. Yet often when I suggest this I catch a lot of crap, especially from the libertarian types but also the establishment types, who for whatever reason, I would guess ego or something similar, just don’t want to hear it.
I blame the Romans.
I got sick from drinking from an aqueduct once. True story.
The one you said was full of glitter and tinsel, right?
I have to say the last couple of lines in this article amused me greatly.
Tate and Peterson are two sides of the same coin. They’re both right about women; they just use that information to different ends.
There are certainly those who will claim that everyone in prison is a victim, but when news of a physically weaker man getting raped in prison finds its way into casual conversation, the response is much more likely to be along the lines of “Ha ha, don’t commit crimes then” than pearl-clutching and disclaimers of accountability.
Envy…
Recently I remarked (elsewhere) that the root cause of such philosophies and cultures is simple: it’s easier to steal than to make.
Dressing this up with rationalizations may win you academia-cred, but doesn’t change the underlying reality.
This makes me remember the trope that people are drawn to study and work in psychology because of their own mental issues.
It is obvious trans people are dealing with mental issues – except the kids who have parents and/or teachers dealing with mental issues. How could anyone not expect high profile trans activists to have correspondingly significant mental issues?
Yes, but never forget: Another strong motive is the opportunity to bully with impunity.