It’s Friday, I ain’t got no job, and I ain’t got shit else to do… no, that’s not the opening verse to the Bidenreich’s new and improved national anthem. But it is the reason you’re getting this.
First, via Vox Day, Millennial writing at its finest. Did you know this year marks the WNBA’s 25th anniversary? How on earth haven’t we had a Federal Month of Thanksgiving yet? Anyway, this is why I had to quit teaching:
Let’s start here: my house, a couple of months ago, a good friend over for dinner and the conversation turning toward the article you’ve just started.
The first line, the very first, and already we’re deep in GrrrlWorld. Me me me me me. A couple of months ago it was me, and now it’s me, and the article you’ve just started, which is also all about me, all smashed together in the kind of “syntax” that would make Strunk and White start drinking at 7am. I should probably just post this picture of the authoress and stop here, since it makes my argument better than words ever could:
but I will soldier on. The agonies I endure for you people!
I nodded as my friend spoke. He hit all the expected notes. I don’t watch because they can’t dunk; I don’t watch because they’re like a good boy’s high school team; I don’t watch because, you know, I could probably beat them one-on-one.
Perhaps you even saw your own reasoning reflected in his. At its heart, this reasoning insists that people don’t watch the WNBA because men run faster and jump higher. That is, in fact, true. Most men do run faster and jump higher. And, yes, it’s incredibly exciting when one of those men runs fast and jumps high and we watch, in awe.
Here again you — awful Pale Penis Person that you are — might be tempted to stop reading. I mean, this is supposed to be an article praising the WNBA, and she has just admitted that the WNBA does in fact suck. If I were grading this, I’d write something like “you appear to have undermined your own argument here” in the margins. But wait, there’s more!
Long before Big Business saw the value, the players of the W stood against racial injustice, and for equality, and took the hits—“Every direction we turned, we were walking into a wall,” says WNBA legend Sue Bird—for representing the folks at society’s margins….“And you should want that. We are standing on the shoulders of women who didn’t back down just because casual sports fans didn’t think they were worthy. That’s what makes our league better, because we have faced those hurdles. I can’t think of another league that gets hit with every single last knock, and I don’t see that going away, but we’re not going to let that stop us.”
You’ll have to trust me on this, I guess, but I just now ruined a perfectly good monitor by spewing red ink everywhere. This, friends, this is GrrrlWorld, which is the headspace of our entire fucked up “culture” these days. Her “argument” — her paper’s thesis — is buried seven paragraphs deep, and can be summarized as follows: You, a basketball fan, should watch a shitty parody of basketball for reasons that have absolutely nothing to do with the game of basketball. No, you should watch a shitty parody of basketball — the Not Another Teen Movie of sports franchises — because it makes Basic College Girls feel good about xzhymselves, and that’s the only important thing.
And it goes on like this, y’all. On and on and on and on, like the authoress was on a page count. And that’s what it’s like “teaching” Basic College Girls. No matter what the topic, every paper you get is page after page of word salad, every paragraph of which can be boiled down to I, I, I, me, me, me. World War II was important, no doubt, but what really matters here is how young Khaleesi feels about it….
From a reader:
▪️The 19th Amendment was a mistake.
▪️It led inevitably to the rise of toxic feminism (toxic for both sexes, btw).
▪️Women in the workforce destroyed traditional family roles, where a man could earn enough to support a family and the woman could be a homemaker.
▪️Women in politics have turned us into a nation of feelz not laws.
▪️If we’re no longer a republic, we’re not a democracy either; we’re fast becoming a gynocracy c.f. Nancy Pelosi and AOC (who is going to be President)
I wish I could, buddy… I wish I could. David Hume once said something about propositions “so absurd, they elude all force of reason.” Female suffrage is like that. My rule of thumb is: The soundness of any new idea can be immediately judged, with nearly 100% accuracy, just by looking at its proponents. In the case of female suffrage, Susan B. Anthony was your typical Yankee lunatic — Quaker, abolitionist, the kind of cause-head that was fanatically eager for the Civil War to start, so that the Yankee war machine could march down South and shoot all the badwhites. Elizabeth Cady Stanton* was similar, and both of them were sane, reasonable moderates compared to the likes of Virginia Woodhull.
Or, you know, you could just look at Friedrich Engels, whose The Origins of the Family, Private Property, and the State is pretty much the sole source of every even semi-rational-sounding feminist “argument.” Feminism was, from the very beginning, a Marxist conspiracy to destroy society and bring the Revolution. What more needs to be said?
Brit in London writes:
Recently I rediscovered “An Open Letter to an Open Minded Progressive” – something I seem to rediscover once every few years and have a full read. To me it’s a bit of a modern day classic and a lot of the roots of “our thing” can be found there. Wonder if you’ve read it and, if so, your thoughts?
I haven’t, though on a quick skim it seems to be the kind of thing I once really liked. Once, because the author is arguing in good faith, and that’s guaranteed to fail. Look, y’all, it’s pretty simple: There’s no such thing as an “open-minded Progressive.” And when I say “no such thing,” I mean it’s a category error. In other words, “open minded” and “Progressive” aren’t two circles on a Venn diagram, that don’t happen to intersect now, but theoretically could. That’s a profound misunderstanding of “Progressivism.” Put simply, but 100% correctly, people get into Progressivism precisely because they’re NOT open-minded, don’t want to be open-minded, never will be open-minded.
Progressives are fanatics. They’re conformist assholes who move in total ideological lockstep, because Progressivism is nothing but social sanction for being the worst person you can possibly be. They’re an entire tribe of Gollums, sitting around in dark caves plotting their revenge on the world, praising each other for how utterly fucking evil they are. They’re cancer.
Dave B asks,
At what point do you think normal people start to say they have had enough, that voting harder is a waster of time, that the whole shitshow needs to come down, and people start hitting the streets?
In my more upbeat moods, I see glimmers of this already happening. In my darker moods — which, not gonna lie, are ever more frequent — I suspect the answer is “never”… or, at least, not until total financial and social collapse, the kind where Mad Max movies look like light escapist fare.
The truth is no doubt somewhere in between, and since I like to keep things light on Fridays, I’ll point out that we here are exceptions. Not just because we’re “dissidents” (or whatever self-dramatizing term we choose to use this week), but because we’re online at all. Something like 3% of Americans are on Twitter, and that’s not a typo; I’m not forgetting a digit. Facebook, it’s true, claims something close to a billion users, but I think I’d trust Fauci’s numbers before I trust Zuckerberg’s. Maybe there are a billion accounts, but I’d bet long money that whatever the real numbers are, 75-90% of them are bots.
In other words, “echo chamber” is rapidly going the way of “fascism,” in that it now means little more than “something the writer doesn’t like”… but there’s a grain of truth to it. I spent the years 2008-2016 hearing about how Obama was going to put us all in FEMA camps… and before that, I spent the years 2000-2008 hearing about how George W. Bush was going to put us all in FEMA camps. Even in wonderful havens of calm rationality (*ahem!!*), the Internet has this tendency to boost the signal… and with boosted signal comes boosted static. I’m not telling you life is great — I personally would be checking my ammo supply, had I not lost all my guns in a tragic boating accident last summer — but it’s not as bad as all that, either.
Do you visit [Leftwing, or even just pop culture] sites? Do you even use social media? Do you watch any TV/Netflix/etc.? In short, how do you come by your knowledge? Do you just keep tabs on the Enemy and his devices? Like the Zman actually tracking down Gurl Science abstracts, do you look over the edge into the abyss on a regular basis?
I don’t use social media anymore, but as I’ve written, back when I was trying to carve out a niche for myself in academia I was an early adopter. (People forget how new this stuff is; Facebook only dates from 2004, I think, and Twitter is like 2009). I tried Gab for a time, but I got really fucking sick of (((people))) putting (((parentheses))) around (((words))) — ok, ok, I get it, show me on the doll where Bibi Netanyahu touched you. Just put (((girls))) inside the parentheses and these comments are indistinguishable from the lament of every high-school onanist who got shot down by the head cheerleader… but I digress.
I haven’t watched tv for years. No, seriously, I was cutting the cord long before it was cool, and my favorite band is one you’ve probably never heard of. I do support the, ummm, entrepreneurial spirit of freelance shipowners from the age of sail, though, if you follow me, so on the rare occasion I want to watch something I have lots of options. I rarely watch something just for the sociological insight — life’s too short, you know? — but since even the stuff that looks kinda interesting beats you over the head with it, I end up getting a sociology lesson whether I want one or not. For example, I hear they’ve made another attempt to film the novel Dune, and I’m actually quite looking forward to it — half because it’s a cool story and someone should be able to get it on screen, and half because I’m wondering just how badly they’ll fuck it up with Social Justice. Right now, my money’s on a steamy love scene between Paul and Stilgar…
Mostly I keep in touch with people the semi-old fashioned way, via phone and email and personal visit. I have some family within driving distance — brother-in-law is Normie to the core, while Sis is, sadly, your typical soccer mom (remember that phrase?), which is just a leveled-up BCG. They have kids, so between all of them I get all the Current Year I can stand, and then some, every time I go over there for grill and sportsball.
Well, gang, I think that’s enough rambling from me. Y’all come back now, y’heah?
*Wiki sez: “In her memoir, Eighty Years & More, Stanton said there were three African American menservants in her household when she was young. Researchers have determined that one of them, Peter Teabout, was a slave and probably remained so until all enslaved people in New York state were freed on July 4, 1827. Stanton recalled him fondly, saying that she and her sisters attended the Episcopal church with Teabout and sat with him in the back of the church rather than in front with the white families.”
So, you know, not JUST a slaveholder, but an awful, condescending, paternalist one, too!! #CancelStanton. Be sure to tell all the purple-haired, face-shrapneled feminists in your life.Loading Likes...