The Perpetually Outraged will be Perpetually Outraged – T. L. Knighton

Posted on by Sarah A. Hoyt

The Perpetually Outraged will be Perpetually Outraged – T. L. Knighton

The perpetually outraged are funny to me. Oh, they infuriate me as much as the next person, but they’re funny. They’re always out there, hunting for things to get upset about. The thing is, from time to time, people give it to them.

For example, take the outrage over all the racists claiming they would boycott the new Star Wars movie. Now, none of the hateful cabal that made up the Sad Puppies said they would boycott anything. Most of us were giddy as school girls with backstage passes for Justin Beiber. But someone on Twitter was talking boycott, and that’s all it took.

Now, those who are perpetually outraged could have looked at the numbers and pointed out how pathetically few there were. They could have just shaken their heads, called those folks idiots, and thanked God (or whoever) that there would be that many fewer people taking up space in line on opening day.

But they didn’t.

You see, it was nothing more than a couple of trolls, trying to stir up stuff. Sure, plenty of outlets went on defense, claiming that the fact it was a troll attempt doesn’t negate the fact that there are real racists out there. Well, yeah, there are. Far too many of them (and one is far too many of them), but that’s not the point.

It’s like the University of Virginia rape case. Oh, it turned out to be complete bovine excrement, but the perpetually outraged, now in damage control mode, claimed that while the story itself wasn’t true it outlined a very real problem and was therefore important.

Again, bovine excrement.

If the issue was as widespread as many claim, then why was a false story needed. Why weren’t the perpetually outraged screaming about how fake rape claims make it harder for people to believe the real cases? Where was the outrage at that?

The funny thing is that, at the core, we want the things the perpetually outraged claim they want. We want our daughters to go to college and not have to worry about being raped. We want people paid equally for equal work. We want minorities to be treated properly. We agree on these things.

The difference is, we disagree about the details.

For example, we don’t just look at how much men make when compared to women. We recognize that the alleged gap isn’t because of some nebulous patriarchy that seeks to keep women oppressed. This supposed gap is because women have chosen to take on positions that simply don’t pay as much. Yet somehow, this too is the patriarchy’s fault.

Don’t ask me how, just roll with it.

Let’s talk about rape on college campuses. It’s a real problem, right? Well, that’s the allegation, anyways. However, heaven forbid you talk about avoidance tactics for young women. Nope, can’t have that. If you do, it’s victim blaming.

Of course, I fail to see how it’s victim blaming when you advise a woman to avoid drinking too much at parties, or to not walk across the dark, deserted campus alone, but it’s not to tell someone to not pull money out of an ATM in a bad part of town or to not let anyone see how much cash you’re carrying. [To be fair, we should advise young men not to drink too much at parties, either, because pictures and the internet is forever.  Is that victim-blaming too? — editorial note, SAH.]

All of those are avoidance tactics, ways to prevent becoming a victim. Women are generally warned about the rape avoidance tactics primarily because they’re far more likely to be victims of rape than men. However, we tell all genders about avoiding criminal threats. Yet only the warnings on rape are apparently wrong. Why is that?

The perpetually outraged can’t see their victories. They can’t see them because they are too busy looking for more enemies. They’re seeking out villains in everything they look at. It’s why they can’t seem to enjoy a work without filtering it through the lens of their outrage. “There aren’t enough minority characters,” or, “the minority lead character is a token,” or, “this movie full of aliens has insufficient diversity”.

Seriously, it leaves us scratching our heads. We can’t comprehend it, because we just can’t win.

For example, I’m a white dude. It’s how I was born, it’s who I am, and I’m not going to change it for any reason. Yet, thanks to the perpetually outraged, if I have an insufficient number of minorities in my book, it’s proof of racism. If my protagonist is a minority, but doesn’t conform to their idea of what that minority should act like (I thought stereotypes were bad), then I’m guilty of tokenism. If I base my book in a world based on Western Europe, I’m clearly a racist as well…but if I base a book on Meso-America, then I’m guilty of “cultural appropriation”.

And here we get to the biggest failing of the perpetually outraged.

With their constant outrage, they’ve proven to me and many like me that we just can’t win. Nothing I write will be good enough for them. As a result, I no longer care. Larry Correia has a diverse cast of characters in his work, mostly serving as heroes, yet he’s supposedly a hateful, racist, misogynistic homophobe. So, with that in mind, I tune them out.

The irony here is that I was more than willing to listen. We need more heroes of black and Hispanic descent? Make your case, but I’m inclined to agree that it wouldn’t hurt. We need more heroes who are gay or lesbian? Again, make your case. I’ll listen.

But the perpetually outraged don’t want to make their case. They want to be outraged. It’s there reason for existing. It’s their air, their water, their manna.

So, I no longer care. Neither do a lot of other people.

As a result, we ignore them…when we’re not laughing at them. We do that a fair amount too, mostly because the frothing anger gets funny. Especially when the perpetually outraged don’t know what they’re talking about.

Unfortunately, some people actually listen to the perpetually outraged. Maybe they don’t want to be the target of their outrage. Maybe they’re just gullible. Maybe they’re just idiots. I don’t know. What I do know is that there are far too many people who seem to care about not offending the perpetual outrage. Too bad for them that there’s nothing that will stop the perpetually outraged should these people accidentally offend.

It’s times like that when I’m most glad I stopped caring what they perpetually outraged think of me. You see, dealing with them is all mind over matter. I don’t mind, because none of them actually matter.

304 thoughts on “The Perpetually Outraged will be Perpetually Outraged – T. L. Knighton”

      1. I agree. That comment was c-ist and 4-ist.

        I demand that the entire rainbow of other letters and numbers be represented.

        (BTW to refer to the rainbow of letters as an “alphabet” is extremely Westo-centric. What about people who read and speak languages that use ideograms?)

        Like

                1. Well, there were less incidents of screen endangerment from consumables a few years back when it seemed that every Thursday our esteemed hostess managed to touch on something that set off some socio-political maelstrom. On the other hand there was more danger from head pounding and blood pressures rising.

                  Like

        4. Worse than Westo-centric, it’s culturally-appropriative. The true alphabets, like the Phoenician & Hebrew alef-beth, have been demoted to mere “abjads” while the term alphabet has been appropriated by the Greek & Latin orthographies.

          Liked by 1 person

          1. I was exchanging some messages with a Peruvian whose English was likely better than mine. In one thread he used the word “analphabet” to refer to people who can’t read.

            I had to stare at that one for a moment. He probably knew English grabs random Greek words for English vocabulary, so he stuck “not” and “letter” together.

            English, bring a tricky mistress, uses Latin roots to make “illiterate” instead of “analphabet.”

            The funny thing was, I knew the Greek prefix because Asimov wrote an entire short story depending on it…

            Like

            3. Sorry, the first thing this brought up to me was Tobias in “Arrested Development”. He wanted to combine the philosophies of an analyst and a therapist to become the world’s first “analrapist”.

              His business cards almost got him arrested.

              Like

          2. I am inclined to believe that the spread of Alef-beth around the Mediterranean was the result of trade, and people recognizing a good thing — i.e., a phonetic, non-pictographic writing system — when they saw it.

            Greek lacks the equivalent of ‘c’, although it does have a letter that is transliterated as ‘ch’. Let’s blame the Romans for the c4c problem.

            Like

        5. For a few decades 4 was sold as the appropriate number for a nuclear family: two parents and two children. This, we were told, was necessary for staving off overpopulation and the resulting disasters it would bring. (Never mind that this practice would actually result in a moderate rate of shrinkage…)

          More recently there has been a move to call this number into question, but not rationally. Now we see the argument moving into the mainstream that the ‘goal’ should be to cut down the population.

          Therefore 4 should either be shunned as a number representing outmoded thinking or it should be embraced as a number that has been enslaved and robbed of its status.

          Like

          1. Well, we only need look to the hero/wet dream of most of those calling for such as that, China, to see how successful such “reducing the population” schemes work. Milady Hoyt linked to it last night, in fact, They have abandoned their one child policy because it has brought disaster. Of course, also like those calling for such, they have waited too long to admit reality and it is likely a goodly bit too late.

            Like

            1. I am inclined to believe that the spread of Alef-beth around the Mediterranean was the result of trade, and people recognizing a good thing — i.e., a phonetic, non-pictographic writing system — when they saw it.

              China went about as China does, with a top down diktat, forcing the policy upon the people.

              Here it is being done through years of inculcation through the government schools, reinforced at the ‘finer’ institutions of higher learning and by the selling the idea through media. It is much easier to get people to move where you want them to be when they think it is something they have chosen for themselves.

              Like

            1. I switched schools due to a move in the (USA) first grade. The school I moved from taught the vowels as “A, E, I, O, U, and sometimes Y and W, too.” The school moved to allowed that Y might sometimes, but was having none of this W thing. I still wonder how that first school (or that particular teacher) figured W in English.

              Liked by 1 person

              1. In Virginia schools teach that the first Thanksgiving was celebrated at Jamestown. The rest of the country is taught that it was celebrated in Massachusetts. So when our new neighbors’ children transferred to school in the Piedmont of NC the children found that what they knew for a fact wasn’t.

                At some point in life the you are given the chance to learn the lesson that what you are being taught in school is not necessarily so.

                Like

              3. Consider the words hot, hog and hob. Each one has the same central vowel pronounced the same way. Then compare the words hoo, hoe, and how. Arguably, these are all H followed by two vowels forming a diphthong pronounced differently from the single O in the first three, so that makes W a vowel in this particular case.

                Like

        2. Doing without vowels is part of the cultural heritage we share, she and I.

          (’Course, this is one of only a few cultures not protected by the Harpies of Tolerance…)

          Like

    3. I represent the Palindrome Liberation League. We are here to rescue you. Please follow me. Quickly. Quietly.

      Like

      2. We represent the Palindrom League,
        The Palindrome League,
        The Palindrom League.
        And in the name of the Palindrome League,
        We wish to welcome you to racecar land.

        Like

          1. This? This is nothing compared to some heights of silliness we can ascend. I’m particularly fond of the meta threads.

            Like

                  2. JP – sorry to be the one to break the news, but she loves us. You she merely tolerates.

                    (Or was that the other way ’round?)

                    Like

      3. Pay no attention to that man – We represent the League of Palindrome Liberation. Come with us if you want to remain at liberty.

        Like

  3. Something must be done about the perpetually outraged. Their consciousnesses need raising, and people need to be made aware of the dangers and injustices of perpetual outrage. Their needs to be a social media campaign. Those who support the perpetually outraged should be boycotted. We need Congressional investigations, and a special Justice Department task force to investigate the harassment inflicted by the perpetually outraged, and awareness maybe and laws to control them.

    Actually, most (all?) of that is overkill. But that does seem to be their response to the first, incomplete, and often erroneous news report of dubious origin that sparks the latest outrage du jour. And I find it very wearying, especially when as it usually turns out to be a tempest in teapot from them making mountains out molehills, or simply their buying into and touting outright lies that fit their preferred narrative.

    Sorry if I sound a little outraged.

    Like

    1. I think the proper route to effective treatment of the problems of the perpetually outraged is through self-help groups of the sort pioneered by Alcoholics Anonymous.

      “Hi, my name is Arthur and I’m perpetually outraged.”

      Like

      2. Exactly. They’re addicts. Rage addiction is a real thing–the buzz they get from the adrenaline surge causes them to seek out things to be outraged by, and to invent things when they can’t find any.

        Like

        1. They don’t necessarily wait until they can’t find anything real to be outraged about. After all, REAL outrages might require real attempts to fix a problem, and in many cases all they really want is attention,and/or to signal they are part of the PO tribe. Real outrages look too much like work.

          Like

      3. I like the idea of intentionally tweaking them to the maximum until they burn out from the excess output outrage power. Alas, some damn fools will think I actually mean the ‘triggering’ stuff said ONLY to trigger. Warning: Roy Roger’s horse is NOT involved. Thank you.

        Like

    3. We need funded medical research (small groups, easily-managed data please) to demonstrate that perpetual outrage is Bad For The Health.

      Like

        1. hmm. I wonder if one could make it a diagnosis justifying involuntary commitment to a stress-reducing (ours as much as theirs) regime of treatment?

          Like

      2. I suspect that the perpetually outraged, because they believe they are the holders of truth and justice, would then point to such studies and demand that we immediately accommodate them because to do otherwise is hazardous to the health of any ‘sane’ person — meaning themselves.

        Like

    4. Actually, I’m all for determining what personal insult offends a given perpetually outrages the most, person by person, and referring to them as that exclusively.

      A lesbian who is greatly offended by being called a dyke is bugging me with her perpetual outrage? Then all responses will start with, “Well, Dyke Lisa,…”. A black rapper who is then all responses will start with, “Well, N!gger Tyrone…”. Some whimpy white pajama boy then all responses will start with, “Well, Sissy Bruce…”

      Why?

      1. They are routinely accusing me of thinking that way so being polite gains me squat.
      2. It is really what they want. They want me to “let the mask slip” so why not make their day. They will feel all warm and fuzzy at revealing me.
      3. It’ll be fun to watch them get royally pissed at getting what they want.

      I am honestly reaching the point where I see fewer and fewer reasons to adopt this tactic and the biggest ones are more about how it would make things hard on my wife. For the people I’d be “abusing” my attitude more and more is “f*ck ’em”.

      Like

        1. Exactly…call me racist and I’ll happily reply in kind…and I’ve got more stones than most of these sissies.

          I note it isn’t guys who look like Shaft complaining about white racism and then hiding behind the HR department. Guy like that thinks I’m a problem he’ll come to me and we’ll have it out (and. contrary to SJW belief, probably with words instead of fists). We might not like each other at the end but we will resolve things so we can both do our thing without bugging the other.

          Like

      2. The rule on board subs was- never let anyone know your weakness- for they would then harp on it to find out if you could take it. If you couldn’t handle it, then you obviously weren’t cut out for the pressure of submarine living. People could be very verbally brutal.

        Probably forbidden today as unacceptable hazing or some other such PC nonsense. But weeding out the weak is rarely a bad thing.

        Like

        1. The rule on board subs was- never let anyone know your weakness

          Where do you think I learned it.

          Machinery division is not a forgiving crowd :)

          Like

          1. Consider that I had no disbelief to suspend when that scene on the Vorpal Blade came along. I’ve known a couple of your mates in person.

            Like

          2. yes … x TM here, we played rough, and could be quite harsh. … MM , you guys are CRAZY
            I say that in a good way

            Like

          3. You just have to show them you aren’t intimidated. That’s why it’s important that the first day on the boat you go into the M-div office and say “Not one of you is man enough to tape me to the overhead.”

            Works like a charm.

            Like

            1. Listening to sub stories was a great way to pass the time waiting for Operations to get ready to run tests when I was working startup/power ascension at Comanche Peak. It made me regret not taking the job offer from the Navy when I graduated college in 1979. But then I probably would have missed the experience of working at one of the last nuke startups.

              Like

  4. I don’t think they should “make a case” that fictional heroes need to fill diversity checklists. They should just write the dammed stories.

    Like

    1. Exactly. You want books with more “heroes of black and Hispanic descent”? Write one. Write books filled with “heroes who are gay or lesbian”; as long as you remember to make them good characters who are defined by more than their sex lives, I’ll take a look.

      What really drives me nuts is these “back-seat writers” who are determined to make every single book out there address their pet causes and will scream about an author daring to write something else.

      Like

      1. Years ago I read the Harry Potter books. At some point I realized Dumbledore was gay. It was a slightly interesting fact about his character, but I really didn’t care one way or the other. Then it was announced at a conference that he was gay, to rapturous applause. Blech, suddenly it irritated me, exactly because it had become a diversity checklist item to be applauded by people who care about such things.

        Like

        1. I was less interested in his being gay than the fact he was a terrible headmaster, allowing incompetent and manifestly unqualified instructors at his school. Even Snape, unquestionably a knowledgeable Potions Master, was a terrible teacher, capable of much better instruction third-hand (as evidenced by his annotation of the Half-Blooded Prince’s textbook) than he provided in person.

          I am still outraged that Hogwarts offered no instruction in Theory and Practice. How are they expected to produce competent magic users without proper grounding in the conceptual basis of the discipline? Their focus on rote practice probably held back the brighter students (such as Fred & George Weasley) and forced them into nonconstructive outlets for their intelligence!

          Liked by 1 person

          1. The fact that he allowed Harry to stay in *that* household without supervising how Harry was treated made him the “real villain” of Harry’s story. [Frown]

            Like

            1. That household in which Harry was placed, as it is explained, was necessary as it was the home of the closest blood link to his mother Lily. The protection that Lily had bestowed on her son was strongest there, and it was possibly the only place where it would be present.

              Life doesn’t always give you good choices. It is what you do with the choices you have that is important. Something which Dumbledore tells Harry. This is one of the points of the series.

              But, on the idea of greater supervision, I have pondered about that, yes. (We do find that Dumbledore does ultimately intervene when things at the Dursley home become truly outlandish.)

              Like

              1. If I were looking for a way to create an ally for Tom Riddle, I’d put a helpless child into the home of non-magicians who would abuse him.

                I don’t care what Dumbledore might have done prior to the first book.

                Harry should have had a strong hatred toward his “family” and other non-magicians.

                Imagine how the story would have gone if Dumbledore was known to Harry as this “kind uncle” who made sure his “family” treated him right.

                No, I never could get into the first book thanks to Harry’s “home” life.

                Like

                1. This didn’t put me off of the books completely, but I noticed that this environment gave the books a certain Roald-Dahlesque feel to the initial books.

                  I didn’t mind the books, in certain ways, but it did bug me the way they were treated as “revolutionary” in their vision, when so much of it seemed derivative….

                  One thing that really bugged me was that Rawling gave hints of redemption for the Dursley boy (who thanks Harry for saving him); I would have liked a demonstration that the two buried the hatchet, by showing Dursley with Ron, Hermione, and Harry, nervous about sending his oldest child to Hogwarts (with assurances that Harry’s and Ron’s and Hermione’s children will provide support).

                  Like

          2. Riddle, Hagrid, Lupin, Potter. He had a habit of doing favors for young male students that he did not do for female students. (Granger was, IIRC, another teacher’s influence.)

            Like

            1. Although Hermione was pretty much the favorite of every teacher she met (other than Snape), it was Minerva McGonagall who arranged with Dumbledore for her to have the use of a time turner.

              Like

          3. Theory would have required working out the Theory of Magic. Which she didn’t. Witness the great gaping holes in the biggest area of magic they used, namely forensics. Sirius should never have been sent to Azkaban because they should have pounced on him to wring him dry. Once they questioned him under Veritaserum and checked what spells he had cast they would have, however reluctantly, learned of his innocence.

            Like

            1. Exactly — Rowling’s success is proof of the relative importance of story-telling to world-building. (As if any person watching ST:TOS hadn’t already reached that conclusion.)

              It is preferable to have both, of course, but do not imagine the latter will make up for absence of the former.

              OTOH, Sirius was the perfect fall guy for a corrupt government ministry, more desperate to save face than HRC the night of Sept. 11, 2012, and Rowlings’ depictions of the corruption inherent in her world’s government and media entities is part of her world-building that excels.

              Like

              1. Eh, Sirius wasn’t used as the fall guy for the big thing, namely the death of the Potters. Anyway, with Voldemort out of the way, they had less need, and Bellatrix and other Death Eaters were handy.

                Like

                1. What part of “corrupt government ministry” has you confused?

                  I suppose i could have said “corrupt and incompetent government ministry” but I thought I was already sufficiently redundant.

                  Frankly, this is among the least of Rowling’s abuses against competent world-building; she’s a slumlord of a world-builder, using inferior materials in slap-dash manner, with inadequate wiring, plumbing, and foundation, papering over her flaws with sparkly stuff and misdirection.

                  Still fun to read, though.

                  Like

                    1. Didn’t they? Throwing him in Azkaban without regard to his guilt or innocence would seem to qualify.

                      Urban Dictionary offers: “A person who is left with the blame for a crime, regardless of whether they were involved or not.” (Emphasis added.)

                      Like

            2. Here’s a really fun plot hole: they knew Regulus Black had turned on Voldemort, and died three days later, without knowing a single one of the details (as witness how Harry discovered them). there had to be some strange magic behind that.

              Like

      3. “…defined by more than their sex lives…”

        This is the root of my problem with them. They are the ultimate in bigoted stereotypists. (Oh, c’mon, that is so a word!)

        Everyone, to them, is defined by their sex lives. By their melanin content. By the amount of excess poundage they are carrying around. By the color of uniform their ancestors wore.

        Never, ever, defined as a “person” – unique and lovable (or hatable) for themselves.

        Like

        1. Of course not — doing so would entail viewing them as individuals, each unique and idiosyncratic. That would deny the ability to treat people as members of social castes and require they be individually recognized and treated.

          Do you not realize how inefficient that would cause things to be????

          Like

        2. They have to be bigots, they’re too dumb for anything else. They cannot handle the idea that there are billions of people in the world with thousands of shades of opinion on hundreds of issues. They can’t even manage to understand the few dozen people they actually interact with on a regular basis. So they have to put people into one of a handful of boxes – white, black, gay, immigrant, etc. – with all of that person’s attributes defined by the box into which they are placed. It’s pathetic really, I almost feel sorry for them. Then they open their mouths.

          Like

        4. “Intersectionality” is their form of epicycles. Just as the astronomers kept adding another circle to make the orbits work, adding another group is their way of evading dealing with people as people.

          With this difference: the astronomers could predict the path of the planets through the sky.

          Like

      4. Saw David Weber at a con back in ’07.

        I’ll wait for all the pearl-clutchers to get over their swoons…

        Back now? Okay.

        He was talking about the Honor Harrington series and said one day a friend called after reading book four or five and said “David, the Queen of Manticore is black!”

        David: “Yeah?”

        Friend: “I didn’t realize that until halfway through the fourth (maybe fifth) book!”

        David: “That’s the point.”

        Character aspects, like author aspects, should be a light touch, not a club.

        Quality should be somewhat higher on the to do list.

        (And no, politics is not a quality all its own.)

        Liked by 1 person

    2. They are not writers. They are complainers; they are not creators. Perpetual outrage is their raison d’etre.

      They wouldn’t know what to do if suddenly all their complaints were somehow complied to — other than what they already do — which is to keep finding something new to add to their ever growing list of complaints.

      Like

  5. I swear, the next time I hear some sniveling luvvie of a Social Justice Ninny claim that they just wanted to “raise awareness of____” or “start a conversation about ____” I will likely throw some scorn and derision their way. Or even more than I have already.

    Like

      1. Perhaps we should impose a small tax on Awareness, so that they can simultaneously Raise Awareness and Reduce the Deficit.

        I leave the problems of how to assess awareness and whether the tax should be progressive as an exercise for others, being myself so completely unaware that I receive Section 8 Awareness vouchers.

        Like

        1. Problem is, it’s like something Heller would write.

          You can only get Awareness Vouchers if youre unaware they exist. Applying for them means you don’t qualify.

          (I didn’t want to name the book because that would be culturally appropriating Arabic numerals)

          Like

    2. I had an argument with my wife the other night about the current apparent need to remember and discuss, each and every single time he’s mentioned, that H.P. Lovecraft was a terrible racist. Do I share the man’s opinions? Of course not, but I resent the assumption that to like his writing requires me to proactively disclaim that sympathy, rather than being simply given the benefit of the doubt when possible. And given that in practice I have never known a single fan of Lovecraft whose racism was engendered by reading Lovecraft, I have to wonder exactly how big a danger this is, and why people are making so much fuss about it if it’s not actually that big a danger.

      All of which is meant to explain that the next time somebody wants to “raise awareness” of Lovecraft’s “problematic” opinions, I will simply say, “We already know and don’t need it repeated. The man is dead, we’re not changing his mind, nor are his private opinions going to affect our judgement of his work. Move on.”

      Like

      1. The same thing happens with Frege. Every book that discusses his contribution to philosophy and the logical underpinning of mathematics seems to feel the need to mention his horrible racial and political beliefs to explicitly distance themselves from them.

        I kind of figure it can be taken as a given that I don’t share the opinions of 19th century Germans on almost pretty much any social issue you care to mention.

        Like

        1. I find it more convenient to follow the practices of my ancestors and simply hock a loogie* on the floor after mentioning the name of the Devil or any of his presumed agents.

          *No actual loogies, real or fictional, are hocked in the production of this post. All loogies hocked were metaphorical, and hocked under the strict supervision of the ASPCL.

          Like

      2. Most of the writers alive in Lovecraft’s time held views that would be unacceptable today. You can’t change the past. You can acknowledge the bad stuff and still find value in their work.

        Like

        1. Plus they are all long dead so you are not supporting racists even if you buy their stories. I do accept the idea of raising awareness and having boycotts in case of the still living or even recently dead especially if their copyrights now benefit something or somebody unseemly, but when it’s people that long gone it seems rather pointless. Lovecraft knew how to write a scary story, and has left some enduring images, and yes, he was what was common back then. Pretty certain Shakespeare had several now icky notions about things too, but as long as it’s not something that people look at as an ideal to live by…

          Like

          1. ” I do accept the idea of raising awareness and having boycotts in case of the still living or even recently dead especially if their copyrights now benefit something or somebody unseemly,”

            See also: Marion Zimmer Bradley

            Like

      3. He was a Democrat.

        His problematic views on race are no more notable and no more impair enjoyment of his work than Eric Flint’s problematic views, or Mercedes Lackey’s problematic views.

        Like

      4. Lovecraft WAS a terrible racist. Do you have any idea how many eyeholes you have to cut in a white hood for a shoggoth?

        Like

  7. Nice article. Naturally, it will cause outrage. Pointing out that people are being unreasonable is simply unreasonable.

    The answer to faux outrage is to embrace the power of “I don’t care.”

    I’d swear that someone recently wrote a book devoted to this subject …

    Like

          1. Tsk. Do you not see how happy such people are? Do you not realize the one true path to such enlightened happiness is through emulating their example? What are you, some kind of monster who doesn’t want anybody to be happy? You ought be ashamed of yourself! You must be banished from the Land of Happy People until you stop bumming people out and bringing them down with your Bad Vibes!

            Liked by 1 person

    2. I am triggered by the use of ‘bovine excrement’ instead of ‘bullshit’. The term is offensive to persons of cattle droppings. ‘Cow chip folk’ is no longer acceptable, because it is super triggering.

      I’ve triggered myself.

      I need to go to a safer space without me in it.

      *Enlightenment achievement unlocked. Bob has become a buddha of bullshit.*

      Like

  8. The great thing about not being able to win it means you can’t lose either. At that point you have the freedom to do whatever you want and ignore the outrage mongers.

    Like

  9. “You will be made to care.” — Michelle Obama

    The author and many commenters seem to suffer from the delusion that they can ignore these people. Got news for you: with the de facto and de jure legal system in place today, they have all the power they need to make you care. They want to get you fired? or keep Amazon from publishing you? They can, if they want to push it. “Hate speech”, “hostile work environment”, coincidental audits from the IRS, etc.. The tools are there, and any attempt to call them on it legally is met by perjury, destruction of evidence, and pleading the Fifth.

    And they will not stop using that power; they will have to be stopped.

    Like

    2. “No, Mrs. Obama, you CANNOT make me care.” – Me.

      Seriously. You want to try and get me fired, get Amazon to stop publishing me, get me audited? Thrown in jail on trumped-up charges? You can do all those things to me, but you CANNOT make me change my mind.

      No, you* pathetic tyrant, I will NOT be made to care.

      * It’s not you that I’m calling a tyrant, snelson, in case that wasn’t clear.

      Like

      2. Obligatory RAH quote:

        “Mighty little force is needed to control a man who has been hoodwinked in this fashion; contrariwise, no amount of force can control a free man, whose mind is free. No, not the rack nor the atomic bomb, not anything. You can’t conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him.”

        Like

        1. This is true so long as he his mind remains free. You can break and enslave many, but not everyone. This is being proven by those who go to their deaths at the hands of sword wielding terrorists rather than convert.

          Liked by 1 person

          1. Wonder how many atheists have refused conversion by the sword in modern days? So far as reported to date, it appears to be an exclusively Christian phenomenon.

            Like

            1. I’m not certain that non-belief is a cultural option in that/those parts of the world. But if it is, I’d think that the sword-point switch rate is pretty high. Assuming the bad guys allow that. Atheists rank even below pagans in the Islamist hierarchy.

              Like

        1. As time goes on they are less and less satisfying.

          Also, they have escalated to jury on their side and if they weren’t cowards would be happy to go to cartridge. Some days I want to oblige them.

          Like

      2. As the first three have been proven to be ineffective, having been subverted through abuse of power, it would seem that we have but the one choice left.

        Like

        1. And that’s why I and most of the people I know have been investing in metals the last few years. Copper and brass are even pretty when you buff them up a little.

          Now if I could just get my teenage son to stop using up some of my stockpile, er, I mean investment, on the weekends so I could start building equity again…

          Like

          1. And lead has a heft second only to gold.
            While buy two shoot one works, I’ve been more of a mind to buy a case of 1,000, shoot 500, time to reorder another case. But then I’ve got a small club of shooting friends that are always more than willing to help with a range trip test run.

            Like

      3. All of them are under threat:

        Soap: “no-platforming”, “hostile environment”, “hate speech”. Brandon Eich is the poster boy for this, but “it isn’t First Amendment”, even though without the legal climate the government sets up it wouldn’t work.
        Ballot: No enforcement of eligible voter laws, precincts with > 100% turnout, Obama’s unlimited no verification donation websites, import several million illegals and give them drivers licenses. Fraud city.
        Jury: Administrative and regulatory actions don’t get imposed after a trial, so no jury.
        Cartridge: Bullet taxes, redefining armor piercing to outlaw ammo, NY and Connecticut gun registration. Of course, those last two haven’t been generally enforced, possibly because there’s a credible threat that gun owners will shoot back if pushed.

        Note, these are just a few examples; there’s more.

        Like

  10. Widespread affluence; people busy with the task of survival don’t have the idle time to find things to be offended by.
    Virtue signaling; being offended for the right reason shows that you have genuine concern for the currently popular victim class.
    Reinforcing behavior; when you are socially rewarded for your outrage, you can bask in the approval of your like minded narrow minded friends.
    Everyone else; since everyone does it, it must be right?

    As ‘fads’ go, this one has been around way too long (I would also mention the fad of Marxism, except I’m sure Sarah will). It is part of the problem with the partisan divide in this country/world. When you have to be outraged by the other side, there is no room for compromise. Part of the art of ‘getting along’ is to accentuate your agreements and try to minimize the disagreements. If I ‘disagree’ I can compromise. If I an ‘outraged’, there is no common ground.

    Like

    1. “Virtue signaling; being offended for the right reason shows that you have genuine concern for the currently popular victim class.”

      Alternate phrasing: if you walk like a duck and quack like a duck the ducks surrounding you probably won’t turn on and savage you.

      Like

          1. That’s when you need outrage software, with regular updates, to generate your pronouncements of outrage. The person with the latest update wins!

            Like

          2. There are also the ‘speaker sensitive’ outrages. One person (usually a Republican) says something… outrage! Another person (usually a Democrat) says the same thing… crickets.

            Like

            1. The Democrats grease the right palms. That is why President Billyjeff Clinton could get away with behaviour far more egregious than Senator Packwood’s and why Senator Former Grand Kleagle could use the phrase “White N[word]” in a televised interview with only the mildest of blowback.

              It also covers the clownish carbon footprint of Al “Slumlord” Gore, for similar reasons.

              The Devil knows his own.

              Like

    2. You’re missing one: Addiction. I think many of them are addicted to the hormonal surge they get when they get a good rage on.

      Like

      1. It would be so much better if they were merely “Addicted to Love” (beyond their self-love, of course).

        Like

    3. I suspect that much of it is that such people secretly feel embarrassed by their extreme wealth (relative to most of the world) which had come to them not through hard work, but by accident of birth. First world citizens, and Americans in particular, live so much better than everyone else that a bit of guilt can only be expected.
      But if you join the perpetually offended, or as I call them the terminally butt hurt, all it takes is a bit of personal emotion and poof you’ve earned all your very special perks and privilege simply because you care ever so much.
      And heaven forbid any cause should actually be resolved. They must then frantically search for another such or fall into despair as their internal justifications crumble about them.
      I find the same treatment that I would give to a yappy mongrel dog works best. Ignore until they get too annoying, then a boot to whatever part is most easily reached, whether ribs, muzzle, or tail. And if they do manage to sink their teeth in your ankle well then putting them down is highly appropriate.

      Like

      1. If you think about it, there’s the third world, second world, first world, and then the USA. Only Japan and none of the European nations or China have the per-capita wealth of the top ten American states. I read somewhere that Germany only makes it to 27th place among American states. Sweden is below Mississippi. California, Texas, and New York would be in the top ten nations if they were independent.

        Of course, if we keep going on the course we are headed on for the last decade, we will crash and crash hard. We’ll take the rest of the world with us though, and still probably will be at the top of the heap. It will just be a lot smaller.

        Like

        1. Could that be why so many folks find Japan the most interesting foreign country? Could it be easier to cross the language and cultural barrier than the wealth barrier? Or the work ethic gap?

          Like

          1. I think people tend to have a “tourist flyer” view of the rest of the world. Japanophiles might thing that Japan is the land of Anime and pocky and would find the reality of the place kind of disappointing.
            American leftist tend to think of the EU as the place socialism works, but would be very very disappointed to have to actually live as a normal citizen of most European states.

            Like

            1. You forgot short skirts. As in “why do they even have them?” short.

              I have noticed that the animes I tend to seek out have fewer stars than the average. They’re also the ones where the skirt is mid-knee (as the majority of the uniforms are – some are longer, I don’t think I’ve seen any shorter).

              Like

          2. If you’re looking for an easy cultural barrier to cross, Japan isn’t what you’re looking for. It’s a stratified and discriminatory society – I read once that all Japanese (apart from the Ainu) are members of a single tribe, and the in-group and out-groups are kept well-separated.

            There’s a book, Minimal Essential Politeness, which presents itself as, “Okay, you’ve studied Japanese for a few years and are at least minimally fluent. Here’s what you need to know culturally about speaking the language.” It includes an example sentence expressed 24 ways that vary in politeness level, from the way you would express it in conversation with the emperor down to the equivalent of “Get the ()*& off my lawn!”

            I studied Japanese for a few years starting a couple decades ago – I was a member of a local anime club at the time, and I figured that besides maybe helping me understand the videos (unsubtitled Japanese, with a club-provided synopsis available), studying a foreign language would help keep my brain from ossifying, and Japanese would stretch it further than French or Spanish.

            Like

        2. Oz and kiwi-land had a feel sorta kinda like the US, though much more nanny-statish along the British model when you poke at it at all. The UK nowhere feels like the US, nor anywhere else in Western Europe. To get any hints I think you have to head eastward – Poland and The Czech Republic I think have a slight Usaiian penumbra wrapped around their unique vibe. Dunno about the Baltic states, but I bet they are trying like mad to be more shaded like the US given the neighborhood, and so is The Ukraine and what’s left of Georgia (not the state).

          Like

      2. “And heaven forbid any cause should actually be resolved. They must then frantically search for another such or fall into despair”

        Don’t worry. There is very little chance for that to happen; because being outraged/butt hurt doesn’t actually DO anything constructive to fix a problem. It’s nearly the perfect storm of attention whoring. Here is how it works. See and example of “X”. Claim outrage (usually on someone else’s behalf). Scream and cry, write blog posts, tweet on twitter, faceplant all over the facebooks, and then claim it’s all in the name of “raising awareness”. Do it right and they receive accolades from their peers and gain all the personal validation that they crave, without ever having to come up with something that might fix the problem (remember “X”?) because that would be hard.

        The point is, the CAUSE is always secondary to the feels.

        Like

        1. No worries about it, myself. What they do do is so self-evidently counter-productive. Reference Tom’s example – carrying a mattress everywhere or dressing up as a giant genital organ? Oh sure, that redirects attention to their real qualities, not the only things a confirmed misogynist thinks they’re good for…

          Like

      3. Terminally butt hurt? Think the world owes you reparations? Lighten that up with Reparation H! Yes, friends, Reparation H, made with real humour, can ease the discomfort of thinking the world should be perfect. Try Reparation H, it lubes you with laughter.

        WARNING: Reparation H side effects include split sides, wet undies, and scalded sinuses. Do not employ while operating heavy machinery, drinking alcoholic beverages or dealing with the congenitally humourless.

        Like

        1. Back when reparations were a “thing” I shocked a number of friends by fully supporting a policy of full reparations. At least until I laid out my plan for full and equitable reparations.
          You see I thought it only fair than any US citizen could petition the government and receive a free DNA test to determine the most likely source of their ancestry. Then at no cost to themselves they would be returned to that home nation, or at least its physical location, and receive a house commensurate with the local standard and a sum of money equal to five years of the local median income.
          And in exchange all they would have to do is surrender all the meager goods they might have accumulated under their status as descendants of slaves here in America, and formally renounce forever their American citizenship.
          Seems only fair that they should be compensated for the injustice done their ancestors and returned to as closely as possible a state equivalent to what they might expect if said slavery had not occurred.
          I never seemed to get many takers on the idea. Funny that.

          Like

          1. When they were a thing? When did they stop being a thing?

            That said, your plan maps well to mine although I would have given them present value of 40 acres and a mule and let them keep their current posessions.

            Like

            1. They could get ’em in a month if only they would agree that reparation has made after they have been paid.

              Like

    4. There’s also Implied Virtue- your outrage at the mote in another eye means you can ignore the plank in your own.

      Like

    5. “Part of the art of ‘getting along’ is to accentuate your agreements and try to minimize the disagreements.”

      Of course, when one side has repeatedly demonstrated that it will lie about its’ opponents and reality, and that no agreement will be kept once they have the ability to break it, it’s kind of hard to have agreements.

      Like

  11. “All of those are avoidance tactics, ways to prevent becoming a victim.”

    But in victimhood lies power. You are seeking to deny women a prime source of power. Sexist pig.

    Like

  12. The funny thing is that, at the core, we want the things the perpetually outraged claim they want. We want our daughters to go to college and not have to worry about being raped. We want people paid equally for equal work. We want minorities to be treated properly. We agree on these things.

    Problem is that the perpetually outraged don’t want what they claim they want. They don’t really care what happens to other people. They want the emotional high of feelings of superior that their outrage gives them. After all, ‘they’ have refined sensibilities and superior nuance to appreciate the injustices that mere peasants can’t even see much less appreciate.

    They also like being the ringmasters of society. After all, if the lions and tigers aren’t constantly practicing jumping through the flaming hoops they set up, the beasts might turn and eat them.

    Sorry, I’m feeling a little peckish this morning.

    Like

      2. “Summed the true situation quite nicely in spite of your little pecker problem now didn’t you.”
        “Well, self abuse is seldom harmful in and of itself, but still best not exposed to the public.
        And do remember to wash your hands after.”
        “I’ll give you the straight male bit”

        The pertinent points you present today serve to illustrate the problem that the perpetually pained in the posterior are fixated upon.

        Namely penile envy.

        This purely psychological perspective, that perilously approaches cliché, can account for their pathetic perpetual whining.

        Those that promote the philosophy of petulance are attempting to puff up themselves by promoting a disproportionate perception of their own perfection vs. the perceived sins of the pitiful proles that surround them.
        If purblind population around them perversely proceed to ignore their perspicacity, their self-perception is punctured resulting in a loss of prominence. As a result they become even more piercingly shrill.

        For this I say “booger”

        Like

  13. I am part Welsh.
    Historically, the Welsh have been oppressed.
    Therefore, despite being white, I am oppressed.

    Find the logic error! :)

    Meanwhile, I shall express my outrage against a cup of tea and a good piece of chocolate, both culturally appropriated from some far continent.

    Like

    1. Same with the Irish. So I’m oppressed on my Irish and Welsh side,and an oppressor on my English.

      I’m a woman (oppressed).
      I’m white (oppressor).
      I have advanced college degrees (probably oppressor).
      I’m partially disabled (probably oppressed).

      It’s amazing I’m not suffering from some major psychiatric disorder, what with all my internal contradictions.

      Like

      1. Naw, you just have to subscribe to intersectionality – it’s sort of like Magic the Gathering, but with classes of victimhood classes replacing mana colors.

        (Plus intersectionality has 50% more shrieking harpies than MtG)

        Like

        1. I used to say that Magic: the Gathering should merge with Highlander: the Gathering and turned into a LARP. You see people playing, you cut off their heads. (One response I got was “yeah, then you can take their decks.”)

          Was that microaggressive?

          Like

          1. Do NOT tell my students. There’s a Magic: the Gathering game that’s been going for three years now with the same kids. Kinda like the Worlds Oldest Semi-permanent Floating Craps Game.

            Like

        2. The shrieking harpy…wasn’t that a 2/2 red creature? As I recall, in one of those strange quirks of magic, it didn’t have flying, despite the fact that the art work clearly showed it having wings. Common fan theory was that it was too busy screaming about the injustice of being kept on the ground to even realize that it COULD fly.

          Like

      2. Well, self abuse is seldom harmful in and of itself, but still best not exposed to the public.
        And do remember to wash your hands after. (obscure Heinlein reference)

        Like

      3. English, Irish, Scotch, Welsh, and Huguenot. And a few lines that can’t be traced yet. IOW, a typical American whose family has been here for a while. Recently surprised my nephews by telling them that their ancestry traced back to THE Lee family in VA. “But great-grandpa came from Czechoslovakia!” Yes he did- but great-grandma didn’t. And we all know what word comes from people of Slavic descent. Wait until they demand reparations from everyone.

        Like

    2. Straight (oppressor) Male (oppressor) German (oppressor) – Hungarian (oppressor). All oppression, all the time.
      I need to get a hat that says ‘There’s nothing micro about my aggression.’

      Or maybe a shirt that says “Micro aggression? So I can do this a few hundred thousand more times before it becomes real aggression?”

      Like

      1. Come now, I’ll give you the straight male bit, but for German/Hungarian you ought to get some credit for Soviet actions post WWII.

        Like

        1. Don’t you know that while oppression of Progressives counts as Real Oppression(TM), oppression by Progressives doesn’t. That’s the rules I hear from the Progressives, anyhow. Because they never oppress, merely work to improve society and correct injustice and promote equality. [straight face breaks] OK, that’s what they claim, but often it just amounts to tyranny against those they disagree with.

          Like

    4. Half Welsh, quarter Polish- and Poland has been oppressed more than pretty much anyone- Hapsburgs, Romanovs, Swedes, Hohenzollerns, Nazis, and Communist.

      Like

      1. Ottomans a few times too, although they tended to hit, loot, kidnap, and run (or ride when it was the Crimean Tatar auxiliaries).

        Like

  14. I have decided to reach out to the PO-American community by adding characters to a space opera. They will be three women who prefer each other’s company who are assigned to the engineering section. Their names will be Fairbanks, Morse and Perkins. I guarantee you none of the PO-A’s will get the whole joke.

    Like

            1. Close enough. Fairbanks-Morse and Perkins were the most common diesel engines used in U.S. Navy fleet subs during the war. So my three female characters down in engineering are named for diesels that go down a lot…

              Like

              2. What class used Perkins? I thought Gatos and Balaos used a mix of FM, GM, and a handful of Owens.

                I love those big F-Ms…was qualified as an operator on them bitd and went to the introductory maintenance school (first two boats the nukes owned them…last boat it belonged to A-Div).

                Like

                  1. The Archerfish was a Balao. Wiki says it is as Herb says, except that the Owens boats were canceled.

                    After trawling wiki, it looks like Perkins may have been used in British boats, not American. The only class which specifically mentions that manufacturer is the Stickleback.

                    Like

                    3. Wiki could easily be wrong. There were a lot of submarines in both fleets. Wiki being wiki, the records I saw were not consistent in level of detail for all the articles I looked at. At least one submarine was retrofitted with a different engine. If there was a Perkins in an American sub, it might not have gotten onto wiki, or I might have missed it. And Americans could have gotten assigned to a British boat.

                      Like

          2. I got the ships part, but I read a LOT of WWII submarine and cruiser books during my misspent youth. *looks at avatar* Youthier youth.

            Like

            1. *Looks at TXRed’s avatar” – how did you read those books when your eyes hadn’t even opened yet?

              Now, cutier cute might scan…

              Like

            2. I got the diesel part, but didn’t key on it – I just thought, “large engines.” I did not get the submarine part, and I was on a sub back in the 1970s.

              Like

  16. “If my protagonist is a minority, but doesn’t conform to their idea of what that minority should act like (I thought stereotypes were bad), then I’m guilty of tokenism.”

    I wonder what they will think of a woman of Japanese decent who works with her best friend, a part Cherokee woman, and both are quintessentially Middle-Class American.

    Like

    2. Hm? I imagine a story about a community of people brought together thought two women’s journey exploring history and place. A woman of Japanese descent lives in the mountains of eastern NC, say Jackson county. Her best friend, who she first met in school, is part Cherokee. On their time off from work at a local bank they hike in the Smoky Mountains, trying to reproduce the photos of George Masa*.

      *Masa known best for his documenting of the Great Smoky Mountains. Born Masahara Izuka in Osaka, Japan, he settled in Asheville, NC.

      Like

  17. Yeah, I’ve noticed this too – the outraged don’t want solutions, they want to be placated. They live for ‘the cause’.

    Look at the AGW controversies. At a possible suggestion that AGW is NOT as bad as projected, that it might NOT be catastrophic – the shrieking harpies immediately start to shriek. They WANT it to be real.

    A rational person would go “Um, as a species we’re fairly adaptable, and inhabit the planet from the Arctic Circle to the Equator. We can cope.”

    They, however, insist we can’t. It makes little to no sense to me… aside from an ideological standpoint that insists on finding something wrong everywhere with everything.

    Like

      2. They’re offended that someone might actually SOLVE their outrageous problem – b/c 1) it must not have been as big as they made it out to be, and 2) now they’ll have to go to the work of coming up with a new scam… er, issue.

        Like

    2. If it is real it gives them license to do what they truly want to …


      Not that such a plan is likely to work out the way they expect.

      HT: Power Line

      Like

      1. They never expect it’ll be THEIR backs against the wall, facing a firing squad.. which it will be once the Revolution’s gained sufficient momentum.

        Like

        1. I’ve said many times when the revolution comes and as an old conservative I’m imprisoned to stop me from making trouble until I’m very old one of my greatest pleasures will be when the useful idiots are drug out into the yard for execution.

          Their confused screams of “but I support the revolution” because even as the bullets strike their brain they still won’t realize why they are the ones being executed while I still live will have the sweetness of fresh honey and the warmth of a summer’s day.

          Like

      3. “THE ONE AND ONLY REASON POLITICIANS, BUREAUCRATS, AND POLICEMEN WANT TO TAKE YOUR WEAPONS AWAY FROM YOU IS SO THAT THEY CAN DO THINGS TO YOU THAT THEY COULDN’T DO IF YOU STILL HAD YOUR WEAPONS.”

        — L. Neil Smith

        Like

  18. Each morning you wake up with you. There may be other people around but, pondering of Lewis Carroll and Kafka aside you won’t metamorphose into someone or something other than you. You will always be with you. You have to live with yourself.

    So be as decent a person as you can*, and write accordingly.

    Let the perpetually outraged get their panties in a knot. They will whatever you do; it is what they do.

    *With the understanding that, as C.S. Lewis observed, we none of us manage to quiet live up to the standards of what we know of ought and ought not.

    Like

  19. I have been playing “Way of the Samurai 3” recently as I while away the time until Fallout 4 gets here, and there is one part of the game that is particularly applicable to what Tom is writing about. Unlike many games in the “open-world” genre, there are a number of children running around in the world. You play a samurai trying to make your way in the world, and the kids apparently don’t like samurai very much. If they get within range of you, they will start kicking and hitting you, each of which will cost you 5 of your base 1000 hit points. However, that is not the thing I am thinking. If you try and chase the little brats, they will run to the nearest adult and hide behind them. At that point, unless you are prepared to kill both the adult and the child, there is not a lot you can do, so you are forced to back off. When you do that, if the child is a boy, he will pop out from behind the adult and turn his back to you, bend way over, then smack his butt three or four times with his hand. This is a universal Japanese expression for “kiss my ass, butthead.”

    The first time I saw it, I dropped the controller and sat in my chair for about five minutes before I resumed playing, I was laughing so hard. In any case, the point of my long, discursive post is that we should all turn around, bend over, and slap our butts at the perpetually outraged. Then, they would really have something to be outraged about.

    Liked by 1 person

  20. “Let’s talk about rape on college campuses. It’s a real problem, right? Well, that’s the allegation, anyways. However, heaven forbid you talk about avoidance tactics for young women. Nope, can’t have that. If you do, it’s victim blaming.”
    If rape on campus is a real problem, why are colleges doing everything possible to keep law enforcement out of the process of reporting and prosecuting rape? And why is it a problem of special concern on college campuses, rather than, say, the military, or businesses, or off-campus night clubs?
    This is some weird gender conflict going on within the educated classes.

    Like

      1. It seems clear that what the “campus rape problem” is about is not a crime. I don’t believe that you can have a rape without a crime being committed, unless is metaphoric rape. Women, of course, are just as able as men to engage in metaphorical rape.

        Like

        1. If the campus authorities bring the police in there will be reports and possible future students and parents of future students will be able to see the statistics. If the statistics look bad, well they might loose future students.

          On the other hands, as rape does occur, they must find a way to deal with this. So the star chamber proceedings, which are further fed by the steadily defining down of the charge of rape.

          (Not to speak of the added complication of the Department of Education sending out bureaucratic guidelines demanding dealing with the perceived problem and that compounds the difficulties of addressing the matter with any sense. You know – they are from the government and they are here to help us … God forbid.)

          Like

          1. Except that colleges must tell the government about reported rapes and they try to inflate the numbers. They apparently think it looks like DOING SOMETHING.

            Like

        2. If you want to follow the Byzantine, Kafka-esque saga that began with the DoEd “Dear Colleague” letter and led to the DoJ ruling that college courts have no burden of proof, go to mindingthecampus.org. It’s depressing but well catalogued.

          Like

    2. “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.”

      Like

  21. “But the perpetually outraged don’t want to make their case. They want to be outraged. It’s there reason for existing. It’s their air, their water, their manna.”

    This, a thousand times.

    Good post, Tom.

    Like

    2. The perpetually outraged are the professionally outraged–it’s what they do, not for money, but for hate. I started receiving SPLC donation requests after donating to a request I thought worthy (a WWII memorial group). They stopped after I returned one telling them I considered them a hate group.

      Like

  22. For those not familiar with this regular Friday guest poster at Power Line, Ammo Grrl is a (semi-)retired professional stand-up comic, proud gun owner and reformed liberal with a very much dead on column on today’s topic:

    THOUGHTS FROM THE AMMO LINE
    [SNIP]
    Life, my dear friends and readers, is very, very tough. Nobody escapes unscathed. I am not talking here about the extraordinary courage necessary to storm the beaches of Normandy, go house to house in Fallujah, or raise a flag at Iwo Jima. I am talking about ordinary life. If you can’t stand to have a speaker on campus with whom you disagree – for a speech you aren’t even going to attend! – you are going to fold like a cheap card table at the first sign of any real trouble. How are you going to survive a layoff? Where will you find the strength to take chemo? How are you going to deal with the sudden death of a spouse, the incomparable pain of the loss of a child, the very real possibility of some day ending up with a serious disability?

    We pamper our children at their peril. It’s tantamount to denying them vaccinations to shield them from all adversity, challenges, and differences of opinion.

    Like

    1. This may be a case of people not talking the same language. The outrage warriors Ammo Grrl is talking about believe that their outrage is justified on the behalf of other people.They are trying to fix the world, a noble enterprise. You are trying to stop them, an ignoble enterprise.
      What I find most striking when I read Left-wing publications is the self-righteousness. If you are not a progressive, you are the enemy of progress. There is a future to be made, and you will either help them make it or you will be marginalized, at the very least. You have no right to oppose the advance of history!
      Check out this article in Dissent by Michael Walzer: https://www.dissentmagazine.org/article/islamism-and-the-left
      It is poorly reasoned and poorly written. Walzer has an impossible job — he has to compare the crusades of the 11th century with the Islamic fanatics of today, as though they are the result of the same historical forces (of course they are not and cannot be, any more than Mussolini’s fascism can be compared to the Roman fascism of two thousand years ago).
      After you read it, check Walzer’s wikipedia page. He is about as high in the councils of the Left as it is possible to be.

      Like

  23. Over at the comments on that Sad Puppies article on Wired, someone who doesn’t like Sarah says this in response to this:

    “Care to support any of the character assassination with quotes or links?”

    “anything on her website? The most recent post talks about “the perpetually outraged.”

    Guess he didn’t read the byline. But it’s nice to know that even people who hate us read this blog. :-)

    Like

  25. Some of the perpetually outraged are such because it is in their nature. As an economic determinist, I hold, however, that the majority of the perpetually outraged are such for a clear and obvious reason….they get rewarded for being outraged.

    Witness the plethora of offices and departments in academia, government, NFPs, and so on where the perpetually outraged are hired and paid well to continue to be outraged. Mattress Girl got credit for a senior thesis for carrying a mattress around. Oh, and for being outraged.

    One could argue, and I have seen it frequently thus, that the attack on the Puppies was outrage due to a possibility that the SF establishment might be voted into giving a slice or two of the SF business profits and kudos to non-establishment achievers. The non-Awards were fuel for perpetuating the outrage.

    And that is why outrage cannot go away. Because if problems are solved and communities are brought together and opportunities are equal, then the outraged don’t get preference.

    Like

  26. This reminder brought to you courtesy of the pundits at Power Line:


    Some of us combine the two, of course.

    Like

Comments are closed.