A short thread of possible interest, on a subject we’ve touched on before.

If an illustration of crime would help, this one is quite vivid:

What would you do in this case?

https://t.co/w2joaaDoSx

— The Post Millennial (@TPostMillennial) September 4, 2023

The story here. Note the line,

Update, via the comments:

Regarding the video above, commenter anon a mouse suggests,

Not, I think, unreasonable. Assuming one were interrupted while making a nice pot of tea. Though I’d imagine it’s easier to think of such things when you’re not taken aback by the unreal nightmarishness of it all.

Pst314 adds,

Again, I’d guess that many of those who’ve witnessed or experienced serious, aggressive criminality may have been wrong-footed and inhibited by their own disbelief – their own struggle to process the alien behaviour that they’re seeing. Sociopathic activity and feral predation can – to the civilised – seem bewildering and surreal.

If another horror-show example is needed, here you go. Note the merriment. The sense of fun.

It’s perhaps worth noting that egalitarian assumptions don’t exactly help on this front – say, the belief that such creatures are just like us, only more oppressed, and that their wellbeing is somehow a matter of great importance. A conceit that is not only wrong, and insulting, but which is often disabling when it really matters.

If, for instance, someone with a big, shiny knife is breaking into your home in the middle of the night, you should not, ideally, be distracted by any great concern for whether or not your attempt at self-defence results in them getting injured or ceasing to be. Not least because their ceasing-to-be would be a very good thing. A gift to the world.

And yet, among our betters, we see all kinds of mental contortions and obvious dishonesties:

It’s pretentious, neurotic, and morally revolting.

See also this chap, who, being sophisticated, can’t bring himself to use the term Molotov cocktail. You see, it was only a “beer bottle stuffed with toilet paper and gasoline” that was thrown, “non-violently,” into someone’s car. No biggie.

And we mustn’t forget Mr Zack Ford, a “proud SJW,” who believes that women should allow themselves to be mugged, or worse, lest their muggers come to harm.

Consider this an open thread. Share ye links and bicker.

Variations in human ability continue to frustrate those who would perfect us:

You see, if a problem can’t be solved, the next-best thing is to hide it:

The genius of the “equity-focussed” policies, also being advanced in California and elsewhere, is that they are likely to have negative consequences for both ends of the ability spectrum. The cognitively untalented will be spared the normal incentives to master at least the basics, even the basics of behaviour, while the gifted will be denied access to advanced material more suited to their abilities, resulting in boredom and demoralisation.

Again, hiding that bothersome unevenness in effort and ability.

Readers will note that the retreat from clear metrics into euphemism and pernicious fuzzwords – chief among which, “equity” – not only makes it difficult to determine pupils’ academic progress and actual competence, but also has a secondary effect of making it more difficult to identify the shortcomings of progressive educators and administrators. A coincidence, I’m sure.

The pernicious woo named “equity” – which roughly translates as equality of outcome regardless of inputs – has of course been mentioned here before.

If the examples linked above aren’t sufficiently striking, I do have more.

Consider this an open thread. Share ye links and bicker.

“But why do you think this is happening?”

Turning off replies may not be the best look for a programme called Feedback https://t.co/pUKQIalSYA

— Simon Edge (@simonjedge) August 20, 2023

Update, via the comments:

Before replies were disabled, “loathing your own audience” was a suggestion offered repeatedly and with varying degrees of liveliness, along with “woke nonsense” and variations thereof. The word bubble was used more than once.

However, a handful of outliers – often academics employed as consultants and talking heads by the BBC – complained that the broadcaster is “a vehicle for Tory propaganda.” A claim that perhaps reveals more than intended.

Of course, it’s not just the BBC. It could be Channel 4. Or The Economist. Or Scientific American. Or Nature. Or the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. Or… well, we’ll be here all day.

The sense of there being a gulf – in assumptions and ideology – between what could broadly be called the media class and much of its supposed audience is hardly a rare experience. The impression that said gulf is growing and seemingly irretrievable is also far from uncommon.

Consider this an open thread. Share ye links and bicker.

Further to this Rachel Zegler interview clip, recently doing the rounds, some thoughts from another “actress/activist”:

Indeed, the other sex often seems replaceable — if you're a young, single, childless, careerist. https://t.co/sx86se38yL

— Geoffrey Miller (@primalpoly) August 13, 2023

Ms Belcamino is “an American actress, musician, writer, and social media personality based in New York City. She is best known for her political commentary and viral dances on Twitter.”

She has a degree in mental health counselling.

Update, via the comments:

Regarding this:

Mags asks,

Readers are invited to ponder the conceit that a massively expensive film based on a classic tale for children should exist chiefly to “empower our movement,” i.e., to affirm the politics of mouthy, ungifted actresses. Rather than, say, to entertain children.

Still, I suppose it’s to be expected that obnoxious, narcissistic women should want to re-write a tale that, in its various original forms, is pretty much a warning against female narcissism and spite.

Update 2:

Min points us to this video by The Critical Drinker, titled, “How To Destroy Your Own Movie.”

It is, it has to be said, a strange way to promote an upcoming remake of a children’s classic – to wheel out an actress who boasts of having “hated” the original film, made by the same studio, and who disdains much of the story on which it’s based. And who does so seemingly on-message. Especially when the future of Disney, its very existence, is looking uncertain.

And as The Drinker and others have noted, the glib and joyless ‘strong female character’ trope now sounds much more hackneyed and cringeworthy than a tale in which unlikely friends are made and love is found, and in which a malevolent, magic-wielding queen is chased by dwarves and an entire forest of critters, before being crushed under a giant boulder, rightly, and then devoured by vultures.

The merits of the remake remain to be seen, of course – though given the star’s pronouncements, and Disney’s current trajectory, hopes of a triumph, a film that will be remembered fondly for the better part of a century, seem misplaced. The 1937 animated version may, however, reward rewatching. Seen as a child, the Evil Queen’s comeuppance – very much deserved – is quite something. Not least the vultures’ look of delight as they circle down towards her crushed remains. A pointed, lingering shot that slowly fades to black – now securely lodged in the memory.

Also, open thread.

Apparently, it’s a thing:

And because you want to know:

Not merely a woman. He is women.

Update: via the comments:

Mags notes this,

And replies,

Well, it is an odd thing to be proud of. A bit of a stretch, really. It’s not clear to me why autogynephiles should be entitled to pride any more than devotees of any other fetish. Should we applaud and affirm people who like to be spanked, or to wear nipple-clamps, or rubber hoods, or who like to visit schoolgirl sniff parlours? And what about those poor downtrodden members of the eproctophile community?

And yet there are activists who struggle to comprehend why ladies on the whole would rather not have their toilets and changing rooms invaded by porn-addled, cross-dressing misfits.

The kind of men who think that womanhood is ALL ABOUT THE STOCKINGS.

Via.

Consider this an open thread. Share ye links and bicker.