Category Archives: Culture Wars
Detroit: Where expecting people to pay their bills is “racist.”
The Harsh Dogma of Liberalism: Gays and Abortion.
If you want to prove you don’t hate gays, all you have to do is worship at their feet.
By Matt Walsh
I have never in my life encountered a religion as oppressive, cold, and stiff as Progressivism. I’ve never known a faith more eager to burn heretics at the stake. Even a fundamentalist Iranian Muslim would flinch if he came face to face with a western liberal’s rigid dogmatism. I imagine that even a Saudi Arabian Islamic cleric would take one look at how American left wingers react when anyone deviates ever so slightly from their established orthodoxy, and say to himself, “man, these people REALLY need to chill.”
The Cult of Leftism has many tenets, and it demands full compliance with all of them, but nothing in its creed compares to the sanctity of their two great sacraments: child murder and sodomy. You must not question these, but tolerance alone will not be good enough. You must celebrate them, too. You must worship at their altar. You must sing hallelujah at the mention of their names. You must fight for a society where infanticide and gay sex are awarded a protected and privileged position. When a man decides to kill babies for a living, you must call him a ‘health care provider’ and a ‘healer.’ When a man decides to announce to the world that he enjoys sex with other men, you must call him a ‘hero’ and a ‘pioneer.’ You must quite literally give him awards for his courage.
Nothing less will be allowed…
So I suppose my point here is simple: if you aren’t willing to become a liberal, you might as well finally stand up and condemn it. There is no middle ground anymore. There never was to begin with, but even the illusion is fading. Either fight for life, family, and Truth, or else join the ranks of the nihilists and hedonists. The distinction between the two sides is not a murky no-man’s land colored in hues of gray; it is a stark and sudden line in the concrete. You are either for truth or you are not.
Either/or, black or white, right or wrong. Sorry, there are only two options, and you have to choose one. Progressivism says that you are either with it or against it, and on that point I agree.
“Communitarianism”, “Intersectionalism”, and Other Totally Worthless Shit Taught at our Universities
Posted on | July 8, 2014
Regular readers remember Witchwind, the radical feminist that commenters have nicknamed “Windy.” She’s a wacky man-hating disciple of Mary Daly and Dee Graham, and inspired worldwide laughter with her anti-intercourse rant: “PIV is always rape, OK?”
Last week, Witchwind made an announcement:
After a succession of intense and mind-blowing discussions with friends, recent events and several weeks of trying to get to the bottom of why I find radical lesbianism so misogynist, I’ve just experienced a major shift or breakthrough in my feminism. One thing led to another, and I realise that the essential problem i’m trying to talk about is much larger than radical lesbianism, and relates to separatist communitarianism as a liberation strategy — the idea we should form a small, elitist community separate from women as much as from men, rather than focus on our potential to bond with all women and on all women’s potential to wake up to our reality. . . . I do have the impression of having having found a missing link which now helps me to see the whole picture with much more clarity and depth. Therefore my focus will no longer be on radical lesbianism and identity politics as such, but on the wider phenomenon of separatist communitarianism, whether it be radical lesbian, lesbian feminist, radical feminist, “intersectionalist”, etc. When our bonding with women is based on the exclusion of other women, then we aren’t really bonding with women but erecting a fictitious shield of “us” vs “them” to protect ourselves from persecution (a threat in which we include women), but which prevents the spreading of feminism to other women by preventing our contact and bonding with such women. . . .
If that makes sense to you, seek psychiatric help immediately.
You can read the entire 2,500-word excursion into lunatic gibberish, but it doesn’t become any more coherent. Insofar as it is “about” anything, it is about Windy trying to find an anti-male ideology that, while understanding female heterosexuality as women’s brainwashed cooperation with their own oppression, does not have the effect of blaming/shaming women for their heterosexuality.
Having spent the past six months plowing through the radical feminist syllabus (“Fun With #RadFem: ‘You Magnificent Lesbians — I Read Your Books!’“), I could imagine an effective manifesto/agenda for their movement, and might even be worried about their potential for success — if they weren’t so hopelessly batshit crazy.
This has been an impediment to feminism for decades: It is a movement organized around the grievances of neurotic misfits, and has attracted to its banner every type of kook, weirdo and nutjob imaginable.
In this sense, a mentally ill Women’s Studies professor is simply following in the insane footsteps of Women’s Liberation pioneer Shulamith Firestone, who suffered a nervous breakdown after publishing the 1970 feminist classic The Dialectic of Sex and eventually died alone as a 67-year-old schizophrenic.
Majoring in Crazy Studies
One of the reasons that radical feminism is so influential on university campuses, but generally disdained outside academia, is that the campus environment is a consequence-free unreality. Tenured professors can (and do) preach all manner of impractical nonsense and, on campuses that are home to thousands or tens of thousands of impressionable young women, it is fairly easy for the tenured radicals to attract scores or hundreds of misfit followers.
For example, there are nearly 30,000 women enrolled at Ohio State University’s Columbus campus. How many of those students are majoring or minoring in Women’s, Gender and Sexuality Studies, or pursuing graduate degrees in that department? Suppose that the WGSS department enrolls just 2% — one in 50 — of women at OSU. That’s almost 600 students, a drop in the bucket relative to the total enrollment, but still a substantial force, if they can be organized and deployed as activist “shock troops” in protests, etc.
Anyone who questioned the legitimacy of Women’s Studies as an academic discipline would be shouted down as a misogynistic Neanderthal, and so this department is protected from outside criticism by a sort of force-field of political correctness. Within that protective cocoon, fanatical ideologues are permitted to promulgate the most astonishing radical nonsense. Consider, for example, the freshman-level course “Gender, Sex and Power” (WGSST 1110), which is the prerequisite to all other courses in Ohio State’s Women’s, Gender and Sexuality Studies department. A recent section of WGSST 1110, taught by Varsha Chitnis (a graduate student pursuing her Ph.D.) included in the course syllabus Andrea Smith’s article “Heteropatriarchy and the Three Pillars of White Supremacy”:
Heteropatriarchy is the building block of US empire. In fact, it is the building block of the nation-state form of governance. . . . As I have argued elsewhere, in order to colonize peoples whose societies are not based on social hierarchy, colonizers must first naturalize hierarchy through instituting patriarchy. In turn, patriarchy rests on a gender binary system in which only two genders exist, one dominating the other. . . . Just as the patriarchs rule the family, the elites of the nation-state rule their citizens. Any liberation struggle that does not challenge heteronormativity cannot substantially challenge colonialism or white supremacy.
From there, Smith goes on to complain about “the family being conceived of in capitalist and heteropatriarchal terms,” so that rhetoric about protecting the family leads to “increased homophobia.” Smith argues for challenging “the concept of the family itself,” in order to “reconstitute alternative ways of living together.” In case you were wondering about Andrea Smith, she is on the faculty of the University of California-Riverside, having received a Ph.D. from the infamous “History of Consciousness” program at UC-Santa Cruz (“The Worst School in America”). So, through the content of this Women’s Studies course, the crackpot radicalism of a fringe figure (Smith was denied tenure at the University of Michigan) is imported from California to Ohio, at taxpayer expense.
Lest any reader think that I have cherry-picked an isolated and anomalous example, let’s look at the syllabus for another recent section of WGSST 1110, this one taught by graduate student Sonnet Gabbard, who awards 15% her course grade for students’ “Transgressive Digital Art Project,” whatever that means. Among the assigned readings is “Homophobia: A Weapon of Sexism” by lesbian activist Suzanne Pharr, and “Desire for the Future: Radical Hope in Passion and Pleasure,” by Amber Hollinbaugh, who is (I’m not kidding) Executive Director of Queers for Economic Justice.
Paying the Radical Tax
Keep in mind that we are discussing the freshman level introductory c0urse, taught to 17- and 18-year-olds, and required — a mandatory prerequisite — for any Ohio State student who wishes to major or minor in Women’s, Gender and Sexuality Studies. Examine the syllabus for any section of this OSU course, and you will find it crammed with the writings of radical lesbians, inspiring any outside observer to wonder if any heterosexual woman has ever gotten a Women’s, Gender and Sexuality Studies degree from OSU.
Yet within the force-field of political correctness that surrounds this academic cocoon, there is no one who finds this radicalism unusual. The lesbian inmates are running the feminist asylum, and the fact that taxpayers are footing the bill for all this is something that apparently no one at OSU — nor anyone in the Ohio state legislature — can be bothered to notice. So it is nearly everywhere. When the Women’s Studies program at a state university in South Carolina was abolished after hosting a conference that featured the performance of a one-woman play called “How to Be a Lesbian in 10 Days of Less,” everyone was shocked because this had never happened anywhere else before.
In case anyone wondered why Ohio State University was singled out for scrutiny, the answer is: My choice was entirely random. Pick any major university, look up their Women’s Studies program and look up the syllabus for the introductory course, and compare your findings. This kind of radicalism is ubiquitous in Women’s Studies curricula, and it is no surprise that the most popular anthology of feminist writings — Feminist Frontiers, widely used as a standard textbook — is edited by radical lesbians.
Inside their taxpayer-funded campus sinecures, then, Women’s Studies professors are handsomely rewarded for promoting an ideology that strikes most people as fringe extremism. Yet the supply of Women’s Studies majors vastly exceeds the demand and, outside the elite circle of tenured professors and celebrity feminist authors, those who have spent their collegiate careers soaking up “gender theory” nonsense find themselves marginally employable, even as they are confronted with a reality harshly at odds with the worldview into which they were propagandized as undergraduates.
From this clash between academic theory and the reality of ordinary life emerges the ranting lunacy of radicals like Witchwind. What kind of jobs can these intellectual cripples find outside academia, if they can’t find some non-profit “activist” group to hire them? One imagines such women, disheveled and ill-groomed, standing at intersections and holding up crudely lettered cardboard signs:
“Gender Studies Major: Will Criticize Patriarchy for Food”
The saddest part is that this miserable man-hating madness is funded by taxpayers who have no idea what is being taught inside the Crazy Factories of the Feminist-Industrial Complex.
If the heteronormative patriarchy were as all-powerful as feminists claim, then surely there would Republican legislators calling attention to how tax dollars are being used to subsidize this nonsense at state universities across the country. There would be hearings to investigate this and committee reports to expose the truth: What is cost and what are the benefits of Women’s Studies programs? For example, what is the annual cost to Texas taxpayers of The Center for Women’s & Gender Studies at the University of Texas at Austin? What is being taught in this program, and what kind of careers are pursued by alumni of the program? I’d be willing to bet the average Texan doesn’t have the slightest clue what’s going on in Austin.
When we see occasional eruptions of madness — not just insane pronouncements by bloggers, but radical feminists unleashing anarchy in state capitols — there is no need to wonder where this craziness originates: It is acquired in the classroom, where it is taught by academic kooks who would be locked up in insane asylum if they weren’t tenured university faculty members.
I have a firm belief that some people richly deserve to be punched in the face for their behavior. Such a case might be made for this douche bag that Stacy McCain writes about
We are now in Day Six of the Hobby Lobby hysteria, and the Democrat Party propaganda claim that this Supreme Court decision is a theocratic right-wing assault on women’s rights is so firmly embedded in liberals’ minds that responding to them with facts and logic is a waste of time. Deliberate provocation is more fun, and the liberal reaction to Holly Fisher’s provocation was memorable. A young Floridian named Patrick Ryan Kasprik sent Fisher these Twitter messages:
As might be imagined, Kasprik’s rhetoric inspired a lot of blowback, to which Kasprik responded: “Like most satire, the people on the receiving end really don’t get it.” This is the familiar Liberal Satire Defense:“Hahaha! Stupid wingnuts are too ignorant to comprehend the enlightened nuance of my progressive humor.”
Except (a) we understand it perfectly and (b) it’s not funny.
Now, Patrick can hide behind the “satire” barricade all he likes, he has, BTW deleted his Twitter account because, like most Leftists he cannot take the heat. See, Patrick, Stacy McCain is correct, we get your “satire”, and it is not funny, it is not even mildly amusing frankly. What you posted was vile, cowardly, and shows your level of moral retardation Patrick. Take my opening paragraph for example Patrick. I suggested people like you deserve to get punched in the face. Did that offend you Patrick? Well, silly boy, you just missed my “satire” didn’t you? See, Patrick, you are a delusional little man who typifies Leftist thinking. You believe you are morally justified in wishing a woman was raped, or stoned to death because she dares holds a differing view than you do on abortion. So, you launch into nasty attacks on not only that person but people of faith as well. You might, Patrick, stop and think about the irony of that, but I doubt it, like most Leftists, you are so consumed with rage, and spite that you are incapable of coherent thought. People like you Patrick, are the lowest common denominator aren’t you? You hear something you disagree with and you launch into emotional overdrive. There is no room in your world for critical think Patrick. In fact, you are far more like the Taliban than the young lady you verbally assaulted.
From TDG: http://thedaleygator.wordpress.com/
The country is merging with Mexico, as hard as it can.
It is an astonishing thing to do for no particular reason.
Nobody can quite explain why. At the highest level, it makes sense: We have a black president and attorney general who do not like white people, whom they believe to have mistreated blacks. What sweeter revenge than to turn their country a nice mahogany color? And businessmen want cheap labor. But to drastically changes the nature and prospects of what was the world’s leading nation so that McDonald’s can have its burgers flipped at lesser cost—here is a marvel new under the sun. Countries deserve what they tolerate, and this one will tolerate anything. Except freedom of association or expression, or civilized levels of schooling.
From AD: http://americandigest.org/
The World is Batshit Crazy. Ad Absurdum. Boys aren’t Really Boys and Girls Aren’t Really Girls? These People need a Straight Jacket.
Slate is the MSNBS of online magazines, and, here is the latest outrageous outrage they have discovered. Beware Infant Gender Assignment!
Obstetricians, doctors, and midwives commit this procedure on infants every single day, in every single country. In reality, this treatment is performed almost universally without even asking for the parents’ consent, making this practice all the more insidious. It’s called infant gender assignment: When the doctor holds your child up to the harsh light of the delivery room, looks between its legs, and declares his opinion: It’s a boy or a girl, based on nothing more than a cursory assessment of your offspring’s genitals.
Declares his opinion? And you say this “opinion” is based on something as flimsy as genitals? SHOCKING! I mean, yes, in fact gender IS defined by genitals, just as writing for Slate is defined on absurdity. I am trying to conger up how the “evil” gender assignment goes. The doctor, holds up a child, peers at the genitals, and calmly calls the nurse over.
“Excuse me nurse, but this baby appears to have a penis, do you concur?”
“Why yes doctor, that looks like a penis to me”
“So, this baby then, must be a boy”
“Why yes doctor, yes”
See, this is OUTRAGEOUS! And thankfully, we have an outraged American to expose this shockingly shocking outrageously outrageous outrage! I know I am outraged! and we all should be. I mean think about where this might lead! The Slate piece continues
We tell our children, “You can be anything you want to be.” We say, “A girl can be a doctor, a boy can be a nurse,” but why in the first place must this person be a boy and that person be a girl? Your infant is an infant. Your baby knows nothing of dresses and ties, of makeup and aftershave, of the contemporary social implications of pink and blue. As a newborn, your child’s potential is limitless. The world is full of possibilities that every person deserves to be able to explore freely, receiving equal respect and human dignity while maximizing happiness through individual expression.
Wait, what? How dare this Slate writer call that infant an infant? Who the Hell are they to place that kind of label on that baby? I mean, yes, the fact IS that it is an infant, but facts do not matter. I mean, if a penis or vagina do not have anything to do with gender, then how does a baby actually being a baby mean anything either? But, this is important stuff, it MUST BE because only really important topics are covered in Slate right? Either that or this writer is as crazy as they come
With infant gender assignment, in a single moment your baby’s life is instantly and brutally reduced from such infinite potentials down to one concrete set of expectations and stereotypes, and any behavioral deviation from that will be severely punished—both intentionally through bigotry, and unintentionally through ignorance. That doctor (and the power structure behind him) plays a pivotal role in imposing those limits on helpless infants, without their consent, and without your informed consent as a parent. This issue deserves serious consideration by every parent, because no matter what gender identity your child ultimately adopts, infant gender assignment has effects that will last through their whole life.
See! Your child’s life will be RUINED, R-U-I-N-E-D RUINED if a doctor is allowed to say it is a boy, or it is a girl! Oh there are several layers of KRAZY here folks I mean this MUST be a hoax right? No one could possibly believe the absurdities uttered here right? I mean even Slate must no allow this level of KRAZY right? Wrong!
Why must we force this on kids at birth? What is achieved, besides reinforcing tradition? What could be the harm in letting a child wait to declare for themself who they are, once they’re old enough (which is generally believed to happen around age 2 or 3)?
What insanity is this? When was the last time you, as a parent, grandparent, or uncle as I a witnessed a 2 or 3-year-old “declare themselves”? I doubt anyone has, but what would it sound like? Let us think here.
Think of a family gathering. As the adults are drinking their coffees, here comes young Patrick, age 3. “Excuse me everyone” Patrick says, clinking a fork on a water glass. “I am glad I have you all hear, I have something I need to say. I am, in fact, a girl, or rather a woman, trapped in a little boy’s body. Yes, yes, I do have a penis, but do not label me because of that you genderist bastards! I am woman, hear me roar! So, I have a list of demands here, call them my Gender Justice List if you will.” I have more here, but you will have to wait for the book to be published. it is called “My fight for Gender Justice: How My Inner Vagina and I beat Genderism!”
Of course, that is a bit of absurdity to illustrate how
wrong, foolish, inane, insane, BATSHIT CRAZY this writer really is. Yes, Cuckoo for Cocoa Puffs!
From TDG: http://thedaleygator.wordpress.com/
. In a ruling Wednesday morning, the United States Patent and Trademark Office cancelled six federal trademarks for the name of the Washington Redskins.
Currently, federal trademark law does not allow the registration of any names that bring individuals or groups into contempt or disrepute. The PTO cited this rule in their decision regarding the Redskins’ name.
Here are twelve other trademarked names that apparently didn’t come up on anyone’s offense radar.
Figgas over Niggas: This pending trademark seeks to cover a line of “Apparel for dancers, namely, tee shirts, sweatshirts, pants, leggings, shorts and jackets.” “Niggas,” of course, is a slang version of the word “nigger,” a term considered highly offensive towards black Americans.
Kraut Kap: Another recently-filed trademark, this one for a line of plastic lids. “Kraut” was made famous in World War II as a derogatory term for opposing German soldiers, as well as Germans in general.
Dago Swagg: A label created for a line of clothing. ”Dago” is a corruption of the common name Diego, and is used in English-speaking countries as an offensive term for those of Italian descent, and occasionally people from other Mediterranean countries as well.
Cracka Azz Skateboards: Unsurprisingly, this trademark was taken out for a line of skateboards and longboards, as well as associated clothing such as bandannas. While the USPTO helpfully notes that “The wording ‘cracka azz’ has no meaning in a foreign language,” “cracka” is a slang version of “cracker,” which in this context is a term of derision for whites, used primarily within the black community.
You Can’t Make A Housewife Out Of A Whore: This trademark for T-shirts and hats appears to imply that women involved in prostitution can never transition into the domestic role of a housewife. Such an accusation would certainly “bring them into contempt or disrepute,” the stated reasoning for eliminating the Redskins trademark.
Blanco Basura: A seemingly innocuous phrase, Blanco Basura, rendered into English, is actually the highly offensive slur “white trash.” White trash is a derogatory insult that typically refers to poor, white Americans, who have a penchant for crime and a patent disrespect for authority. Apparently, they thought they could go unnoticed designing a hateful beer.
Home Cookin Biscuit Head: Intentionality, as we well know, is not required in order for something to be highly, highly offensive. They should’ve done their due diligence before designing this logo for the restaurant industry. The term “biscuit head” has its origins in the Korean War, when American GIs picked this unseemly term to describe the shape of Koreans’ heads.
‘teensdoporn.com’: This is a classic example (Safe For Work) of a harmful stereotype used to justify condescension toward teens in the form of countless hours of sex-ed in high school. It wrongfully supposes that all teens are sex-crazed maniacs, who given the chance, will opt for trading their sexuality on a website for fame and fortune.
Gypsy Soule Women Who Live By Their Own Rules: This line of makeup containers and tote bags is a double whammy. “Gypsy” is a term for the itinerant Romani people that derives from the erroneous belief they originated from Egypt, rather than India. In addition, the “Live by their own rules” component hearkens to the common stereotype that Romani routinely ignore the law and engage in criminality.
Mammy Jamia’s: A company going by the name of A & S Cairns Limited has decided to attach its good name to an antebellum slur used to refer to an enslaved black woman who was in charge of household affairs, particularly caring for white children. The product? Frozen fruits and vegetables. Was it really worth it, A &S?
Uppity Negro: Intended to be imprinted on mugs and apparel, this trademark references the frequently used adjective “uppity” to describe blacks who agitated for greater respect and civil rights in the Jim Crow-era South.
All Natural My Dadz Nutz Carmelized Jumbo Redskins: Available at MyDadzNutz.com, this line of savory peanuts is unlikely to run into trouble for applying “redskin” to a line of peanuts. One might argue the two terms describe different things, and so the overlap does not matter, but that hasn’t stopped the old name for Brazil nuts from fading away. Kaffir limes, meanwhile, are a discouraged name in the Oxford Companion to Food, as “kaffir” is a highly offensive term for blacks in South Africa.
Found at TDG: http://thedaleygator.wordpress.com/
Posted on | June 15, 2014
Such is the substance of the campus rape “epidemic,” as I explained Wednesday (“Sticks and Stones May Break My Bones, But George Will’s Column Raped Me”) in rejecting the claim that skepticism toward feminist rhetoric is morally equivalent to rape.
Feminism’s hegemonic dominance within elite academia has been achieved because cowards are easily intimidated by intellectual bullying, but George Will refused to play along with that charade. His reply to a group of Democratic senators is a masterpiece of concision:
Dear Senators Blumenthal, Feinstein, Baldwin and Casey: I have received your letter of June 12, and I am puzzled. You say my statistics “fly in the face of everything we know about this issue.” You do not mention which statistics, but those I used come from the Obama administration, and from simple arithmetic involving publicly available reports on campus sexual assaults. The administration asserts that only 12 percent of college sexual assaults are reported. Note well: I did not question this statistic. Rather, I used it. I cited one of the calculations based on it that Mark Perry of the American Enterprise Institute has performed . . . So, I think your complaint is with the conclusion that arithmetic dictates, based on the administration’s statistic. The inescapable conclusion is that another administration statistic that one in five women is sexually assaulted while in college is insupportable and might call for tempering your rhetoric about “the scourge of sexual assault.”
The administration’s crucial and contradictory statistics are validated the usual way, by official repetition; Joe Biden has been heard from. The statistics are: One in five women is sexually assaulted while in college, and only 12 percent of assaults are reported. Simple arithmetic demonstrates that if the 12 percent reporting rate is correct, the 20 percent assault rate is preposterous. Mark Perry of the American Enterprise Institute notes, for example, that in the four years 2009 to 2012 there were 98 reported sexual assaults at Ohio State. That would be 12 percent of 817 total out of a female student population of approximately 28,000, for a sexual assault rate of approximately 2.9 percent — too high but nowhere near 20?percent.
The arithmetic is indeed “simple,” and the administration’s claims about the prevalence of sexual assault on campus don’t add up. Even if we accept the claim that only 12% of sexual assaults are reported, multiplying the number of reported sexual assaults eight-fold still does not yield a number equal to 20% of female students.
Where did this ginned-up phony rape “epidemic” originate? What is the source of the “one in five women” number? A 2007 Justice Department survey that has been helpfully analyzed by Glenn Kessler of the Washington Post. Anyone familiar with social science methodology can examine the questions asked in that survey and see that the fundamental problem is how the questions were phrased: Respondents were asked about “unwanted sexual contact” and even attempted “unwanted sexual contact.” In other words, if your boyfriend even tries to do something “unwanted,” you’re a victim.
Perhaps the people who designed that survey did not deliberately bias the results in a way that exaggerated the incidence of “sexual assault.” Perhaps the researchers did not even think about how their survey might be hijacked for political purposes. Perhaps it is, in some sense, ultimately impossible for researchers to quantify in any definitive way the content of people’s sexual experience.
On the other hand, however, feminists have spent the past four decades trying to convince women that male sexuality is inherently violent and oppressive. (How many times must I recommend Daphne Patai’s valuable 1998 book Heterophobia: Sexual Harassment and the Future of Feminism as an analysis of this troubling phenomenon?) It’s not just deranged radicals — “PIV is always rape, OK?” — who embrace feminism’s demonized view of male sexuality and, when I encounter social science research which appears designed to confirm that view, I am not inclined to accept claims that the methodological flaws of the survey are entirely coincidental. Glenn Kessler comments:
On its Web site, the National Institute of Justice notes . . . that “researchers have been unable to determine the precise incidence of sexual assault on American campuses because the incidence found depends on how the questions are worded and the context of the survey.” It said that two parallel surveys of American college women were conducted in 1997 and came up with very different results, with one survey showing rapes were 11 times higher than the percentage in the other survey. The reason appears to be because of how the questions were worded.
If it is a known fact that the wording of survey questions can affect results in this way – multiplying by a factor of 11 the reports of rape — the reliance on such surveys to generate statistics that are clearly inflated cannot be accepted as a mere coincidence. The conclusion of George Will’s reply to the Democrat senators:
I think I take sexual assault much more seriously than you do. Which is why I worry about definitions of that category of crime that might, by their breadth, tend to trivialize it. And why I think sexual assault is a felony that should be dealt with by the criminal justice system, and not be adjudicated by improvised campus processes.
This is the real crux of the problem: University officials have insisted on treating accusations of sexual assault as disciplinary infractions rather than as matters of criminal justice. Why? Because the vast majority of such accusations involve “he said/she said” situations where a felony conviction would almost certainly be impossible.
The Brown University case of Dan Kopin and Lena Sclove may not be typical, but it demonstrates the fundamental problem. No one wishes to minimize the seriousness of sexual assault, but when such an incident is cited as evidence of universities tolerating “brutal rape” on campus, we’ve gone through the looking glass into an alternative reality where words have no fixed meaning.
“When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.” “The question is,” said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many different things.” “The question is,” said Humpty Dumpty, “which is to be master — that’s all.”
From TOMC: http://theothermccain.com/
Please forgive me: Maya Angelou died recently and I didn’t even mention it. I didn’t realize that according to the highly revered (if only by liberals) Bill Clinton, she spoke with the voice of God:
“God loaned her His voice. She had the voice of God. And He decided He wanted it back for a while,” Clinton said at the memorial service, held this past Saturday at Wake Forest University in Winston-Salem, North Carolina, where Angelou taught as the Reynolds Professor of American Studies since 1982.
To honor the former Speaker With the Voice of God, let’s have a little poetry:
Dancin’ the funky chicken Eatin’ ribs and tips Diggin’ all the latest sounds And drinkin’ gin in sips.
Puttin’ down that do-rag Tighten’ up my ‘fro Wrappin’ up in Blackness Don’t I shine and glow?
Hearin’ Stevie Wonder Cookin’ beans and rice Goin’ to the opera Checkin’ out Leontyne Price.
Get down, Jesse Jackson Dance on, Alvin Ailey Talk, Miss Barbara Jordan Groove, Miss Pearlie Bailey.
Now ain’t they bad? An ain’t they Black? An ain’t they Black? An’ ain’t they Bad? An ain’t they bad? An’ ain’t they Black? An’ ain’t they fine?
If I had written that myself in a drunken stupor as a joke, it would be regarded as racism at its most vicious. But that really was written by Maya Angelou. The poem is aptly entitled “Ain’t That Bad?” It’s bad, all right.
Pretending that a child’s finger-paintings belong in the Louvre next to Rembrandt isn’t helping anyone. It would be far more constructive to encourage black writers with literary talent than to hype race-obsessed moonbats like Maya Angelou, who play into the stereotypes fondly treasured by condescending liberals.
On a tip from Mr. Mentalo.
From MB: http://moonbattery.com/
Found at MM: http://maddmedic.wordpress.com/
From MM: http://maddmedic.wordpress.com/
Armed & Dangerous: The Terrorism of the LGBT Radicals
Joanne Moudy | Jun 08, 2014
When the word ‘terrorism’ is used today, most people equate it with Muslim extremists, radical bombings and hijacked aircraft. But there’s another form of terrorism happening right here in America, and the perpetrators are out to destroy the very fiber of our Judeo-Christian heritage and U.S. Constitution. Welcome to the bloody LGBT battlefield where everyone is fair game in a relentless, multifaceted assault on our humanity.
Make no mistake about the LGBT intentions. No longer content to ‘fit in’ or simply be ‘accepted’ by others for living an odd lifestyle, today they are out to castrate the minds and hearts of others into supporting their deviant faith – or crush those who might oppose their ranting into oblivion. As per the LGBT website, their goal is “…to seek to change the hearts and minds of Americans to ‘equality’…” – unless you happen to be an American who doesn’t want to be brainwashed.
Read the entire article at Townhall.com: http://townhall.com/columnists/joannemoudy/2014/06/08/armed–dangerous-the-terrorism-of-the-lgbt-radicals-n1848920/page/full#!
The establishment media is complicit in the “fundamental transformation” of America, so we can hardly expect it to be forthcoming regarding what that transformation entails. That’s why sites like this one are grateful for first-hand reports on situations unlikely to be exposed on the evening news. This email from a concerned parent is a prime example:
I am a parent in Oakland, California and I have a kindergartner in public school. My child came home [Thursday] and told me about the MANDATORY assembly for gay “pride” month. Parents had NO idea this was going to happen and I’m totally blindsided by it.
There is a video on the school’s website showing the assembly… It was nothing more than homosexual indoctrination about the meaning of the rainbow flag and “queer” history. On stage was the rainbow flag but NO American flag. And then a “gay men’s chorus” sang songs about homosexual “freedom.”
This is an elementary school and children as young as 5 were present. Like I said, parents were NOT informed in advance. My child brought home a bookmark with the rainbow flag on it and a quote from radical lesbian poet activist, Audre Lorde, whose work includes a book called “Uses of the Erotic.” This is for Elementary School! …
Then they show videos about how all “families” are the same – two dads, two moms, etc. The video of the entire assembly is on the school website:
If you send children to a government school, you may be subjecting them to this nauseating brand of brainwashing, which is intended to undermine millennia-old conceptions of family and morality. If you pay property taxes, you finance it.
Let’s close today’s lesson with a quote from a Founding Father of progressivism:
When an opponent declares, “I will not come over to your side,” I calmly say, “Your child belongs to us already… What are you? You will pass on. Your descendants, however, now stand in the new camp. In a short time they will know nothing else but this new community.”
CLEVELAND: ‘Biggies’ Gas Station & Convenience Store decorated with virulently anti-semitic murals by its Palestinian Muslim owner
Imagine what would happen if these murals were similarly anti-Muslim.
Contact information for Cleveland Mayor Frank Jackson: http://www.city.cleveland.oh.us/CityofCleveland/Home/Government/MayorsOffice
Cleveland Action News 19 via EOZ (h/t Liz) At first glance, you may not notice what’s painted on the side of Biggie’s gas station and convenience store at the corner of E.55th and Cedar. Amongst other religious and political commentary, is one image that’s so disturbing, so grotesque, we have to blur it out in order to post it or use it on TV. The picture shows a priest engaged in a sexual act with a baby. There’s writing on top that says, “Talmudic priests in Church. Sex with minors permitted.” It’s an image that Biggie’s owner Abe Auiad told us – flat out – he stands behind.
The owner is trying to say that this is actually an image of a priest doing a circumcision on a baby. The problem is that the wording up above says, “sex with minors permitted.”
The owner of Biggie’s, Brahim “Abe” Ayad, a forty-something Palestinian Muslim who lives in North Olmsted, once explained to Douglas Guth of the Cleveland Jewish News that the murals represent his “protest against ‘evil-doing Zionists’ who, among other offenses, he claims, took away his Palestinian father’s land to make way for the state of Israel.”
Ayad further explained that “[t]he shocking imagery on his walls are his way ‘of fighting fire with fire,’ and that ‘[i]f they want to insult me, they should know how it feels to be insulted.’”
“I have a problem with the editing, so any interview I give, I will give live,” adds Ayad. Ayad says he, himself is disturbed by the image, ” Yes, I am – actually, I am very – but that is all I have to say.”
One other disturbing element about this mural is that the gas station sits right across the street from the George Washington Carver School for grades K-8 and their playground. The image is on the side that is in plain sight of students.
The stomach-turning image is there for everyone to see. 19 Action News viewers called into our station complaining. People living in the neighborhood like Prentice Edwards are shocked when they notice the mural. Afterwards, he continued walking along the sidewalk, but insisting on staring straight ahead so he wouldn’t catch even a glance.
“I know that people don’t want to see that or even hear about anything like that. Other than that, all I can say is that is sad, and it doesn’t make sense,” says Edwards.
Cleveland Police are investigating. Previous complaints about the murals have gone nowhere.
See Video Here: Cleveland Action News 19:
From BNI: http://www.barenakedislam.com/
The role of the sycophant press in a utopia is to keep the mob state of frenzy.
The frenzy requires the mob be terrified at utterly imaginary Chicken-Little style dangers while drugged and numb to real dangers.
The frenzy requires the mob to be forever discontented at whoever the designated enemy is: in Nazi Germany, the designated enemy the Jew; in Communist Russia, the Capitalist and the Jew; in Islamic nations, the Great Satan and the Jew; in America, the rich, the white, the male, the Christian and the Jew. In all cases, the sycophant press can never report on real dangers, because this would require the Glorious Leader do actually do something to solve a problem. But imaginary dangers (Global Warming, Hole in the Ozone Layer, DDT, Acid Rain, Alar, White Supremacists, Hate Crimes, Homophobia, Heterosexual AIDS, Sexual Harassment, Income Inequality, Gender Income Bias, Theocracy) require nothing but giving the Glorious Leader ever more power to solve them.
From AD: http://americandigest.org/
You cannot escape, you will be absorbed!
“weary of multicultural stock photos? well too damn bad!
the cover of every kid’s textbook, every magazine advertisement, every college brochure, every TV commercial, every government pamphlet, urgently, frantically, demands — DEMANDS! — more more more interracial joy. to pass a TV or a newsstand these days is to clinch & grimace. this pathetically desperate Big Brother “lean across the finish line” insistence on the happy human family (of satisfied corporate consumers and forward-looking progressive voters). yet no amount of multicult propaganda (or homosexual propaganda) will make it “normal”, it will always be painfully fake and never real.”
From AD: http://americandigest.org/
Bob Copeland, Donald Sterling And The Criminalization Of Private Conversation (For Whites)
Like most Americans (I suspect), I was disappointed by the abrupt resignation of Bob Copeland, the 82 year old part-time Wolfeboro, NH police commissioner who used the “N Word” to describe President Obama to a friend while having a drink at the bar of a local restaurant, thus triggering the latest Political Correctness witch-hunt. At first, Copeland defended himself bravely and it looked like we might get another test of Paul Kersey’s thesis that this whole Ruling Class Show Trial strategy is about to collapse. But apparently the social pressure on Copeland’s family was too great. So Kersey has one winner (Duck Commander Phil Robertson) and two losers (Cliven Bundy and Don Sterling)…plus, of course, the ultimate loser: America. [N.H. police commissioner who used racial slur in reference to Obama resigns, By Wesley Lowery, May 19, 2014]
It’s important to grasp the details of this appalling story.
A woman at a table in the restaurant, Jane O’Toole, overheard Copeland’s remarks and decided to take offense. She even found out who the elderly man was and then contacted the Wolfeboro Police Department to complain about his use of the N-word…in a private conversation.
When Copeland learned of her complaint, he decided to reply by email. He did not deny making the remark and refused to apologize for it:
While I believe the problems associated with minorities in this country are momentous, I am not phobic. My use of derogatory slang in reference to those among them undeserving of respect is no secret. It is the exercise of my 1st Amendment rights… I believe I did use the “N” word in reference to the current occupant of the Whitehouse [sic]. For this I do not apologize – he meets and exceeds my criteria for such.
[Wolfeboro police commissioner under scrutiny for racist comments about Obama, By Sarah Palermo, The Concord Monitor, May 15, 2014]
Everyone knows what Chris Rock means by this distinction. That’s why it gets so many laughs.
Nevertheless, Jane O’Toole didn’t grasp the distinction. So she contacted the New Hampshire Main Stream Media about Copeland’s remarks and they, needless to say, gave the story prominent coverage.
Years ago, the local and national press would have considered reporting on the contents of a private conversation between two elderly men to be both off-limits and absurd. But now, in Obama’s post-America, it is Page One news.
You can’t make this stuff up.
Spend some time with any octogenarian men or women and you can bank on the fact that they will say some inappropriate things, especially if they have had a couple of drinks. We’ll all get there some day; so will Jane O’Toole.
More importantly: President Obama regularly socializes with rap stars who use the N-Word in public all the time. So it’s OK to use the term publicly if you’re black—but it’s a sin to even speak the word privately if you’re white.
Certainly if Bob Copeland was black, Jane O’Toole would never have made an issue out of this.
Is it not a remarkable double standard that blacks are allowed to speak freely in both public and private with no fear of condemnation, but whites must police every word they say lest someone catch a casual remark on their cellphone and post it online? Apparently, in Obama’s post-America, blacks simply enjoy greater political freedom than whites.
What kind of craziness is this?
Wolfeboro, NH is a charming town on the shores of Lake Winnipesaukee with a proud history dating back to colonial times. Many longtime residents can trace their roots back generations. My own parents used to live in Wolfeboro and my oldest sister was born there. A few summers ago, when I walked into a golf shop in Wolfeboro, I discovered that the owner had posted a sign on the wide open front door that read: “Sorry. Have to pick up my car at the garage. Be Back Soon. Make Yourself At Home.”
Business owners don’t have that kind of confidence in the more diverse areas of America. That’s what people love so much about Wolfeboro.
In fact, the central antagonist in this most unnecessary drama, Jane O’Toole, only moved to Wolfeboro four months ago—most likely because of the lack of diversity she unconsciously appreciates, but consciously resents. But this is precisely the kind of doublethink that characterizes most racial agitators.
There was actually a town meeting held at the Wolfeboro Public Library to discuss Bob Copeland’s private remark, or rather, the national controversy that Ms. O’Toole instigated over it. From what I can tell, despite MSM claims to the contrary, the turnout for this meeting was not very high. And some of the people there actually had the courage to defend Bob Copeland. Good for them.
True, a handful of blacks live in Wolfeboro, and some of them showed up at the meeting to protest as well. But I suspect that most of them are associated with Brewster Academy, a boarding school located across the street from the town library, and that few of them actually live there full-time. [VDARE.com note: Wikipedia says that Wolfeboro’s population(2000 census) was 6,083, of whom 0.16% were African American, which is <10 people.]
Certainly, Bob Copeland did a poor job of defending himself. You can watch video of him hobbling on his cane as he is confronted by people more than half his age in the parking lot of the public library. . [Video: Police Commissioner Who Called Obama the N-Word Snaps at ‘Skunk’ Reporter as Angry Residents Demand His Resignation, By Dave Urbanksi, The Blaze, May 16, 2014]
My guess is that Copeland suffers from some age-related infirmities of both the body and the mind, making him an easy target for racial grievance mongers
But the point is this: Informing on white people for sins committed in private conversations appears to be a growing trend.
Just recently, 80 year old Donald Sterling’s girlfriend coaxed him into making crude remarks about minorities during a private conversation and illegally recorded them before someone sent them off to TMZ. Now Donald Sterling has been fined $2.5 million and is being forced to sell his franchise for having an inappropriate private conversation.
And nearly everyone in the MSM and beyond seems to accept that the virtual criminalization of private conversations is entirely appropriate.
It is now perfectly respectable to make an example of a white person if they make an impolite remark about another race in private—and it doesn’t matter if they are friends, relatives, strangers, or even the elderly.
Incidentally, Mitt Romney owns a palatial lakefront estate in Wolfeboro where he remains a familiar presence. You can often see him with his large extended family getting ice cream on a summer evening downtown. But in case you need a further reminder of why Mitt Romney was not elected to the White House, he recently joined the chorus calling for Bob Copeland’s resignation: “The vile epithet used and confirmed by the commissioner has no place in our community,” said Romney loftily. [Romney Rips NH Officials ‘Vile Epithet, By Matt Stout, The Boston Herald, May 17, 2014]
Bob Copeland, a Navy veteran and longtime resident of Wolfeboro where his wife was born, will probably spend his few remaining years behind closed doors out of fear of running into people like Jane O’Toole.
Hannah Arendt defined totalitarianism as the drive to control the inner life of private individuals. And Arendt argued that totalitarianism does not actually depend on government control, but on a “volunteer espionage network” of private individuals who strive to intimidate their fellow citizens into conformity with the party line. In a recent speech, Michelle Obama actually encouraged this: “Maybe that starts simply in your own family, when grandpa tells that off-colored joke at Thanksgiving, or you’ve got an aunt [that] talks about ‘those people…’” [Michelle Obama Would Like Students to Monitor Family Members for Racial Insensitivity, by Pete Kasperowicz, The Blaze, May. 19, 2014]
Thus in Bertolt Brecht’s short play, The Spy, [PDF] a mother and father are enjoying a Sunday lunch with their son during which the parents make some critical remarks about the Nazi regime. After lunch, the son leaves and the parents inadvertently learn that he has gone to attend a mandatory Hitler Youth meeting. For the rest of the afternoon, they both anguish over the prospect that their own son will report them to the authorities for expressing a thought-crime against the regime.
Incredibly, Brecht’s nightmare is becoming a reality in Obama’s post-America.
Matthew Richer (email him) is a writer living in Massachusetts. He is the former American Editor of Right NOW magazine.
From MJ: http://themadjewess.com/
It is easy to dismiss the NBA booting noted jerk Donald Sterling as good riddance to bad rubbish isn’t it? I mean no one, and I mean no one is defending this old fool and his foolish, deplorable words, or his taste in skanks, I mean mistresses. So, a bigot shoots off his mouth, and his fellow owners choose to throw him under the bus, fine right? Well, maybe not. What happens when an NBA owner, or an owner in the NHL, NFL, or MLB, or coach, or GM are “outed” for some other thought crime. Let’s say the individual is found to support traditional marriage, or tighter border security, or to oppose abortion, or affirmative action? How far are we from the day when those are found to be views that are just not welcome in our hyper sensitive society? Senator Majority Leader Harry Reid has already asked the NFL to go after Redskins owner Daniel Snyder because he refuses to change the teams name. The Congressional Black Caucus wants sports leagues to crack down on any owner that is “racially insensitive”. Ask the former Mozilla CEO about his situation. So, get ready folks, get ready to have a new thought police that will decide who gets to own, or run what in America. I will allow Mark Cuban, owner of the Dallas Mavericks to give us a final thought
A day earlier, however, Cuban — while criticizing Sterling’s comments as “obviously bigoted, obviously racist” — called it “damn scary” that a precedent could be set.
“Regardless of your background, regardless of the history they have, if we’re taking something somebody said in their home and we’re trying to turn it into something that leads to you being forced to divest property in any way, shape or form, that’s not the United States of America,” Cuban said. “I don’t want to be part of that.”
There are those that will say that as long as the government is not coming after people for words they say, then our right to free speech is untouched. But, at a certain point we are soon going to be living in a nation where we have the freedom to speak, but might be to afraid to use it. A nation with defacto speech codes barring certain thoughts from being expressed, then, maybe a nation with speech codes dictating that we MUST express certain views or else. In short, a nation where anyone stepping out of line will be subjected to bullying, intimidation, and thuggery. A nation where expressing yourself on Twitter, Facebook, or your personal blog, or even in a private conversation might cost you your livelihood.
From TDG : http://thedaleygator.wordpress.com/
Conservatives, libertarians, Classical Liberals!
Come one! Come all! And get your Raaaaacism ID Card!
It will cost you nothing for the honor of you being shown for what you are!
Over at Protein Wisdom, Darleen Click has published a brief post that succinctly dissects and demolishes the campaign by the Left [with help from Useful Idiot Quislings supposedly on the Right] to Balkanize this country through an unrelenting campaign of real and actual False Consciousness [not the fantasy Marxist version].
Very few posts are truly deserving of ‘must-read’ status, although many are labeled as such, but Darleen’s is one of them.
What we are being fundamentally changed to is a racial spoils system, where individuals must cling to a group identity in order to be “authentic” and socially acceptable. And the group Rulers will be solely in charge of defining the correct thought systems for the members.
It is through such a spoils system [as with all spoils systems since at least the days of Rome] that the Left In America can kill two birds with one stone, as it were. By splitting people up by race, by making them think they have little worth unless they identify with a race-based group:
1) they can more easily reward such relatively small groups with bribes and, therefore, control them because said groups will become dependent vassals of the supplier; and
2) they can help along their scheme to sow Chaos in American Society by destroying the idea of an American Identity in favor of identity by racial group [ie: 'Balkanization'], a Chaotic state that will make it easier for the Left to corral the people eventually under the white-knighted beacons of Order…and Control.
I’ve used many terms to describe this system before, including ‘vile’, ‘disgusting’, and wretched, but, what it is above all, is Evil.
From TCOTS: http://thecampofthesaints.org/
Cool culture is death culture.
It’s cool to do heroin, which must mean it’s cool to O.D. because that is how most junkies end up.
If you have cancer, useless natural medicine is in and effective chemotherapy is out. It’s cool to be pro-choice which means it’s cool to wipe out the black population. Euthanasia is cool. Preserving life is not. Old age isn’t cool. You’re supposed to “live fast, die young, and leave a beautiful corpse.” Gavin McIness: It’s Cool to Love “Not Cool” | Truth Revolt
From AD: http://americandigest.org/
We have set up two phone numbers for Bundy Ranch related issues.
The first number is for those wishing to volunteer for watch and other duties at the ranch and also for those who wish to send supplies to the ranch and need to know how best to send those supplies. Please do not call this number unless you wish to volunteer or send/donate supplies to the ranch. The individual on the phone will have a list of needed supplies. The main point of this number is to be able to establish a tentative schedule in order to best have all positions covered. We need people now but if you can’t make it for a few days or weeks we ask that you still call the line because we WILL have a need long term and we would like to get our roster fleshed out. If you are calling to volunteer be prepared to provide contact info, an estimated arrival date, the length of time you may wish to stay and give us some idea of the skills and equipment you have to offer.
Anyone volunteering for security/watch duty MUST put themselves under the leadership of the on-site security team leader, Jerry DeLemus, an Oath Keeper and the leader of the largest 912 Project group in New Hampshire.
The Watch Roster Hotline number is: 702-793-9217
The second number is to verify or quash Bundy Ranch related rumors. If you are hearing rumors, positive or negative, that are potentially of great importance use this number to get information directly from the folks on site. PLEASE use good judgement before calling this number. If we are overwhelmed with nonsense the line will be of no use.
The Rumor Verification Hotline number is: 702-793-9219
From WRSA: http://westernrifleshooters.wordpress.com/
The Bundy ranch Family. The Newest Endangered Species in America. They would Fare much Better as a Tortoise.
Sympathy for Cliven Bundy and his family.
Why You Should Be Sympathetic Toward Cliven Bundy : They don’t have a chance on the law, because under the Endangered Species Act and many other federal statutes, the agencies are always in the right.
And their way of life is one that, frankly, is on the outs. They don’t develop apps. They don’t ask for food stamps. It probably has never occurred to them to bribe a politician. They don’t subsist by virtue of government subsidies or regulations that hamstring competitors. They aren’t illegal immigrants. They have never even gone to law school. So what possible place is there for the Bundys in the Age of Obama?
Found at AD: http://americandigest.org/