Further to the first item here, biologist Heather Heying on the Mao-ling urge to shut down thought: 

When banal observations like “men and women are different heights” prompts the accusation that I’m both brainwashed and a Nazi, it’s clear that this was not good faith protest. It is true that the authoritarian-left is denying biology, but the deeper truth of the situation is perhaps even more concerning. The incoherence of the protesters’ responses and the fact that the walkout was scheduled in advance suggests something darker: the protesters are “read-only,” like a computer file that cannot be altered. They will not engage ideas — they will not even hear ideas — because their minds are already made up. They have been led to believe that exposure to information is in and of itself dangerous.

Via TomJ in the comments, Helen Pluckrose on the same: 

The problem [for the protestors] was that both of the people [invited to speak] had penises, those penises were white and, as far as anyone knows, responsive to those of the opposite gender. They were hegemonic penises and this was problematic… Resolution of the hegemonic penis “problem” was first attempted via the invitation of not one but, ultimately, all five members of the tenured and tenure-track Women’s Studies faculty at PSU… They all declined to attend, one insisting it was inconceivable that the discussion could be had in good faith given the participation of [James] Damore and [Peter] Boghossian.

Again, the word projection comes to mind.

Kirsten Grind and Douglas MacMillan on “diversity” in practice at Google, and attempts to hide it from public scrutiny: 

YouTube last year stopped hiring white and [East] Asian males for technical positions because they didn’t help the world’s largest video site achieve its goals for improving diversity, according to a civil lawsuit filed by a former employee. The lawsuit, filed by Arne Wilberg, a white male who worked at Google for nine years, alleges… YouTube recruiters were instructed to cancel interviews with applicants who weren’t female, black or Hispanic, and to “purge entirely” the applications of people who didn’t fit those categories.

Short version here. 

And Chris Rossi on the creep of “social justice” and wasting class time with voodoo: 

Further to the last item here, Andy Ngo on attempts to discuss ideas versus recreational outrage: 

“James [Damore] argues, accurately, that there are differences between men and women,” evolutionary biologist Heather Heying said during the panel discussion. “This is a strange position to be in, to be arguing for something that is so universally accepted in biology… You can be irritated by a lot of truths, but taking offence,” — here, Heying paused as hecklers shouted and began to walk out — “is a response that is a rejection of reality.” A non-student protester then yanked the cables from the sound system and shoved the equipment to the ground, breaking an antenna. She was promptly detained by police. “[Damore’s] a piece of shit!” she screamed as she was issued a citation for criminal mischief in the second degree. “Even the women in there have been brainwashed!” Another protester stated: “Nazis are not welcome in civil society.”

Today’s word is projection. Video here. 

Nikita Vladimirov on more “social justice” psychodrama: 

Activists at the University of Vermont have intensified their protests against the school this week, blocking rush hour traffic on Thursday while demanding social justice related reforms… The protesters remained in place [blocking a busy intersection] for about three hours… causing traffic congestion that eventually began to impact neighbouring towns, and even caused problems for the UVM Medical Centre, creating 15-minute delays for ambulances that were headed to the hospital.

Arrest them, and expel them, and maybe this will stop. Anything less will be regarded as encouragement.

And Dave Huber offers a reminder that opportunist outrage isn’t confined to students: 

[University of Delaware law professor,] Sheldon Pollack thought that the academic hoax The Conceptual Penis As A Social Construct was pretty damn funny, and decided to send it along to a male colleague and his son. However, that dread auto-fill feature placed the address of a female colleague on the message. That colleague asked what he meant by the message, indicating it was “inappropriate.” Pollack fully explained what had happened and apologised for the error. Half a year later, the erroneous recipient initiated a formal complaint about the matter… Pollack says the university’s human resources department also recommended that he attend sexual harassment counselling as a result of the incident.

As usual, feel free to share your own links and snippets, on any subject, in the comments.

Via Darleen in the comments, a telling illustration of “social justice” psychology:

“This is what it’s like to be a black student at New York University,” Nia [Harris] wrote in her Facebook post. “You go to a dining hall during February and you see ‘Black History Month Meal’ plastered outside the entrance. You walk inside the dining hall only to find ribs, collard greens, and mac and cheese.”

And on a campus where grievance is currency, heads had to roll:  

Two Aramark employees have been fired by the food service after preparing a meal at NYU during Black History Month that was deemed racially “insensitive.” Reports suggest that the employees are African-American, though Aramark has not confirmed details about the ethnicity of the fired employees.

It’s hard to miss the class connotations of all this “woke” status-signalling. Someone who can spend around a quarter of a million dollars on attending a fashionable university feigns outrage over a menu option and then campaigns until two working-class employees are humiliated and left jobless for some sub-microscopic sin – i.e., failing to intuit the ever-changing fashions of campus “social justice” – all while the sophomore in question publicly gloats and declares her own victimhood.

Imagine the kind of utter bitch who would delight in doing that.

Or put another way,

The patriarchal race to colonise Mars is just another example of male entitlement. The presumed right to use and abuse something and then walk away to conquer something new is a hallmark of colonialism.

No, really. It says so here. The author, Marcie Bianco, is quite adamant on this point. One might almost say feverish:  

The desire to colonise [space] — to have unquestioned, unchallenged and automatic access to something, to any type of body, and to use it at will — is a patriarchal one… It is the same instinctual and cultural force that teaches men that everything — and everyone — in their line of vision is theirs for the taking. You know, just like walking up to a woman and grabbing her by the pussy.

Apparently, and for reasons that aren’t shared, exploring space is not about ambition, curiosity or survival, or even a hope of distant profit; it’s all about “gendered power structures” and “men giving up on the planet they have all but destroyed.”

Naturally, Ms Bianco has a degree in Women’s Studies and has taught “social justice courses” at Rutgers University and John Jay College.

Update, via the comments:

It’s odd how articles of this kind, by self-declared feminists, seem determined to, as it were, erase and marginalise the choices and agency of other, more accomplished women. Are we to believe that Gwynne Shotwell, the President of SpaceX, is a mere dupe of The Patriarchy? According to Ms Bianco, our “queer public intellectual,” yes. 

And what about these ladies here? Are their minds not their own? And has anyone told them this, to their faces? I wonder how that would go down. But this is a standard pattern for dogmatic feminism. Just as Ms Bianco acknowledges only “the menz” who complain about her writing and its laughable conceits, while ignoring the numerous women who also find her article insulting, incoherent and absurd.

And so a question comes to mind. If you were a young woman in search of role models, who might be more likely to inspire? Carolyn Porco, a planetary scientist who worked on the ground-breaking Voyager missions and was Head of Imaging Science for Cassini, and who speaks enthusiastically about exploring – and colonising – other planets? Or Marcie Bianco, a third-rate scold with a Women’s Studies degree?

Answers on a postcard, please.

It’s once again time to hack our way through the deep artistic underbrush of Sandrine Schaefer. Specifically, her 2012 performance piece Ambulation, shared below in sadly abbreviated form, and in which Ms Schaefer presents her buttocks to the world and shifts her weight from heel to toe, while her shoes emit the sounds of her “travels in Mexico.”

Hey, I’m just reading what it says here.

Apparently, the sounds coming from her footwear are “a reward for the curious witnesses that neared her body.”

Mary Katharine Ham on woke scolds and public pushback: 

Here’s how the removal of the [painting, Hylas and the Nymphs] went down — in the most eye-rollingly woke, modern-art-professor way possible. A professor and five members of a “drag collective” walk into an art gallery to talk about viewing art in a non-binary way. Stop me if you’ve heard this one before.

Amy Wax on sinking standards and The New Unsayable: 

An open letter published in the Daily Pennsylvanian and signed by 33 of my colleagues… condemned and categorically rejected all of my views [on the importance of bourgeois values]. It then invited students, in effect, to monitor me and to report any “stereotyping and bias” they might experience or perceive. This letter contained no argument, no substance, no reasoning, no explanation whatsoever as to how our op-ed was in error… To students and citizens alike I say: Don’t follow their lead by condemning people for their views without providing a reasoned argument. Reject their example. Not only are they failing to teach you the practice of civil discourse —the sine qua non of liberal education and democracy— they are sending the message that civil discourse is unnecessary. 

This, remember, is the University of Pennsylvania Law School. For background, see the first items here and here. 

And Andy Ngo on the “social justice” Sturmabteilung: 

In The Baffler, Jessa Crispin writes: 

His desire for stockings and earrings and a flattering skirt did not change his critical stance against capitalism, but it did complicate his view of what socialism or communism could be. “Will there be lipstick under communism?” Yes, [sociology lecturer, Colin] Cremin writes in a new book, Man-Made Woman — but only if men are wearing it, too… A truly progressive man, then, would be one who rejects the social and economic advantages that come from hegemonic masculinity and patriarchal conformity. A “feminine flourish,” as Cremin puts it, of perfume or lipstick or a silk blouse, would undercut a man’s power immediately in both the workplace and on the sexual market. 

Via Ben Sixsmith, in a thread where it’s noted that when many men favoured stockings and beauty spots, this didn’t immediately result in communism or a toppling of “hegemonic masculinity.”

Dr Cremin, of course, has been noted here before. 

Attention, all white women. You and your “whiteness” are “causing real harm and violence.” You are, to put it bluntly, “a perpetrator of harm.”

And so, obviously, what you need is a workshop, where you can “confront your participation in the oppression of others,” which is to say, “confront white womanhood,” and thereby be in “true solidarity” with beings of colour, who are flawless, downtrodden and inherently more noble. Given your own vile and corrupting nature, interaction with beings of colour must only be attempted after following the guidance of suitably enlightened instructors. Instructors who will bestow intersectional epiphanies by steering you to the works of these lofty, selfless warriors, and also to articles published in that high-minded journal for troubled women, Everyday Feminism. 

For a mere $20, you could be stewing in the wisdom of, among others, “artist and activist” Heather Marie Scholl, who was famously interviewed by Gavin McInnes, and whose creative efforts “examine white women’s roles in the establishment and maintenance of white supremacy through… embroidery techniques.” When not toppling the patriarchy with unattractive needlework, or “approaching social justice issues with a productive emotionality,” Ms Scholl boasts of her “BA from The Evergreen State College in Race, Gender and Sexuality.”

So, ladies. Sunday March 4 is the date for your diary. Book early. 

“Men are trash” is a “positive observation.” And full of hope. According to Laurie Penny.

Because modern masculinity – whether yours or mine, or your husband’s or brother’s – “wounds everyone” and is “grounded in sexual violence.”

Via Tim Newman, who adds some thoughts of his own. 

“Through ambiguity… deep CREATIVE STATES can be UNLOCKED.” 

What follows, according to performance artist Sandrine Schaefer, is a brief preview of a site-specific piece that “takes on a time structure inspired by cycles of dormancy in bears,” and in which “the tension between mechanical, geological, and felt time is always palpable.” With that in mind, let’s once again witness Ms Schaefer’s devastating heat-ray of creativity: