More Prizes For Good Girls or a Letter from Sarah to the Political Goldfish – A Blast From The Past From March 2017

anime-2585414_1280

More Prizes For Good Girls or a Letter from Sarah to the Political Goldfish – A Blast From The Past From March 2017

Yesterday I kind of lost my temper.  It was Facebook.  I got just one too many reminders that we were celebrating International Women’s Day.  And didn’t I want to show solidarity?  And celebrate women?

Look, it’s not my fault.  I was bit by a rabid International Socialism as a child and it’s the sort of thing that causes an allergy for life.  Oh, yeah, and International ANYTHING day is a socialist thing, because they never fully realized that they didn’t control the whole world.  Or they didn’t care and just wanted to make their rubes believe they were worldwide.  The Happy People of Brutopia celebrated whatever day they were ordered, and they marched in orderly ranks past the red draped stands, and Socialism would Conquer the WORLD.

Right.  So that was part of why I blew up.  I hate “International” this and that, and the idea behind it.  Whatever good it is supposed to do never actually works where needed, and it does very bad things everywhere else.

Bad things?  How can a day celebrating women be a bad thing?

It is a bad thing in many, many ways: first, what in particular are we celebrating about women?  That they’re women?  Woo Hoo, women exist! Great prizes for good little girls for existing.

Yes, I know what gets accreted to it: women who fought for equality.  women who still fight for equality in dangerous places (like say Afghanistan), women who’ve invented things, women who’ve done special things.

And that’s fine and dandy, but WHY are we celebrating IN PARTICULAR women who did these things?  It is impossible to avoid the feeling that it’s not normal for women to do these things, and that’s why they need to be PARTICULARLY celebrated for having done them.

I mean, I want to make clear that I do admire people who do admirable things.  I just find the implication that doing admirable things while female is not that unusual; that we are not, in fact, impaired children who need to be given special prizes for existing.  Why else would you celebrate WOMEN who do special things more than anyone else who does special things, unless it is because women are naturally inferior and can’t do special things.

So eventually I boiled over, and posted this on the book of faces:

“Women’s Day” is how you know we’re speshull. Or at least that society at large considers us short bus speshull. Treating any group of people as though they need special recognition is like saying “Well done! We didn’t expect you lot to do anything. We’re so proud of you.”
I’m human and I partake of human achievement. What actually is between the legs of the people being celebrated couldn’t matter less to me. Or what they like to do with said equipment.
Unless we’re celebrating sex gods or goddesses, this is just nonsense and giving the impression some animals are more equal than others.
I’m celebrating by hoisting both middle fingers aloft. Lookit my matched set!

I confess I didn’t follow all the answers, partly because I’m trying to finish a book, but two of the answers I got were sadly illustrative.

One was the inevitable man asking me if I’d give the finger to all the women who fought for equality and bringing up the inevitable example of the  young woman in Afghanistan who got shot for fighting for female education, and saying that “She should just have told those women they were whiners and should shut up.”

Need I say that admire everyone who fought for equality under the law, and still fights.  And need I also say that International Women’s Day does nothing to advance that fight?  Thinking that declaring an International Women’s Day will make the barbarians of Isis realize that women should have equal rights is typical of the Disney generation, who thinks everything bad is just a big misunderstanding and can be resolved with a song and dance or a big demonstration of some sort, with painless virtue signaling from “enlightened” people.

And yet, the lowest US infantryman sent to Afghanistan did more to advance the cause of freedom and human dignity, and, yes, female equality before the law than all of the “International Women’s Day”s of the world.

This man’s posturing made me think of pouty Michelle Obama holding up a sign saying #bringbackourgirls, which of course did not do anything, and certainly earned no respect from the Boko Harum who went on, selling and raping and destroying the women they’d taken, completely unimpressed by Michelle Obama’s twitter posturing.  As they should be, since they come from a world of force and barbarism, where, to be fair, they never watched Disney movies, and were therefore never exposed to the awesome power of the photogenic pose.

Then there was the woman who informed me that she taught self defense to children and women (Good for her.  But why ONLY to children and women?) and that International Women’s Day was needed till the body count dropped.

That statement confused me, because it’s so stupid it’s not even wrong.

First of all, I’m fairly sure that anywhere not currently under active invasion by military-age refugees bent on treating their hosts like occupied people, the body count IS falling.  All body counts.  At least in the US and other Western lands, violent crimes have been falling.

However, pardon me if I ask WHOSE body count?  I presume from her statement that she teaches women and children to defend themselves that she thinks women and children die in disproportionate numbers from violence?

Look, one person, any sex, any race, any age, dead by violence is one too many, but in point of fact, most of the people who die by violence are men.  Always were.  Always will be.  Yep, they are more physically aggressive than females.  It’s the testosterone thing.  They are stronger than us, period.  They are also by nature protective.  Which means many is the man old and young who dies protecting his family. And the young men who have died protecting their tribe are countless, from tribal warriors to men who die in combat today.

That’s who men are.  And no, it doesn’t mean that if we got rid of men we’d get rid of violence.  I went to an all girls’ school.  Women are as capable of violence.  Different violence.  Women are more likely to hurt children (look at crime statistics) and women are more likely to kill by stealth and by poison.  We are by nature weaker, and our thought is less direct, but deeper, more interconnected and lending itself better to plotting and convoluted plans.

It’s who women are.  And it’s not all bad.  Throughout history women have plotted and connived and worked to keep their tribe safe.  Not just people like Elizabeth the First, many of whose actions were of necessity what a man would do, just with a different slant, but people like the legendary Portuguese baker who attracted the enemy one by one into her bakery (by baking bread, when both besieged and besiegers were dying of starvation) and killing them one by one with the oven shovel.

And it’s not all bad.  And those women who fought for equality, be it equality for themselves because women were despised, or equality for their sons and husbands, who were slaves at the time, were and are awesome and should be celebrated, no matter if they use their own means to do it.

But… where does International Women’s Day do that?

Where does it even keep a single woman or child in a perilous situation or an unjust land safe?

Teaching women and children self defense is admirable.  Getting them guns is even more admirable, because no matter how much you scream “equal” women and children are NOT physically as strong as men.  And so the very few bad men among the whole of them find them easy prey.  It’s impossible to make them equal.  But Mr. Colt did so.

What didn’t do so were soviet style strikes and calls for an International Women’s Day.

In a free society, in the west, all that does is allow the mean girls’ club to try to elevate themselves at the expense of other people, be it men or women who disagree with the mean girls.  That too is part of what women are, the social schemers and social climbers at other’s expense.  Oh, not all women.  Just the women who are the fair counterpart of the men who would abuse their strength to enslave the weaker.  (I tell you, those two sets deserve each other.)

And all it does is make men look at it — yes, and women too — and wonder why, if women really aren’t inferior we make such a big deal of acts of heroism and strength performed by women specifically.  I mean, if women are equally capable, shouldn’t we celebrate HUMAN achievement, male and female?

I do.  I salute those who worked for freedom, for justice, for equal laws for themselves or others: male or female.  I salute those who freed us from brutality and bestiality.  I ache for my brothers and sisters in societies where women are chattel, because even the boys and men are wounded.  You can’t separate the human species in two halves and hate one and love the other and not hurt all.  And that’s why I ache for boys raised in this lunacy where they’re blamed for crimes that not only they never committed but crimes that their ancestors haven’t committed, generations out of mind.  I ache for American boys held responsible for the crimes of barbarians living under Islamic  dictatorship, as though all men and all boys were interchangeable widgets.

And the goldfish?

Well, some friends of ours had a goldfish, in a bowl.  And every time the goldfish swam from one end of the bowl to the next, he’d look SURPRISED as though he’d never been there before and it were all utterly new.

The thing is, we’ve seen all this “international day for this and that” “Solidarity march for this thing and the other.”

Sure, it can work, properly targeted.  Notice that the Polish solidarity was not for political freedom for Poland “and everyone else in the world because we’re all equally oppressed.”  No, by directing the light of world outrage at a particular place, with a particular regime, it worked.  Or at least it helped the real fight on the ground.

So, you want to fight for the equality of women?  Shine the spotlight on Iran, on Afghanistan, on all the places in the world where a woman can get killed for talking back.  Name, shame, denounce.  Strip the mask for those who apologize for those regimes even among us — many of them “liberal” — and make them own the horrible things they’re allowing to be done.  Be ready for resistance from the victims you’re trying to save, too.  This is all they know, and our ways are foreign.  Yes, one or two will get it, but not all.  But fight there, where the fight is.  Be relentless.

But don’t say “And all the women in the west who are equally oppressed” because that’s bullsh*t and you know it.  Even the country I grew up in, which is objectively sexist (or was when I grew up there) in that every woman is considered inferior to every man, is not EVEN CLOSE to the hells where women get slaughtered for talking back, for learning to read, for being seen with a man not their husband.

As to the imaginary “micro-aggression” of American feminists, those are more often than not the excuse of power hungry females who have nothing else to recommend them, as to why they should be at a the top of the pile.  They have neither beauty, grace nor brains, but they have vaunting ambition, and use the plight of other women — real women, in other lands — as a springboard to arrogate to themselves unmerited accolades and power.

The only thing they have in common with true female heroes is that they have a vagina, and that’s not enough.  Heroic women, though methods tend to be different, have more in common with heroic men than with loudmouth, pampered women who give themselves airs, because they have a vagina.

And it is to those political goldfish I wish to speak: We don’t care what you were born with.  In fact your displays and tantrums, more and more, make the rest of society view you as inconsiderate brats who refuse to grow up. And yes, the rest of society includes grown up women doing grown up things.  But what you are doing is very dangerous.  In your effort to seize unmerited power and acclaim, you’re putting down every other woman, reducing us to a powerless and inferior group, at the same time that — frankly — you make sure no one wants to hear another word from you.  And they will think you’re typical women.

This is how real oppression returns.

Women in the west wouldn’t be where we are without many determined women.  We also wouldn’t be where we are without many determined men.  And without men agreeing with us that equality before the law is right and just.

Convince them otherwise, and you lose everything.  Your posturing and mewling of victimhood will win nothing.  And it could lose us all.

It is said that at least one Catholic saint spoke to the fish, and the fish listened.  I have no such hope with the political goldfish, locked in their blinkered “Wants” and who believe life is a Disney movie.

Fortunately they are a minority.  Most women, like most men, are decent human beings.

It’s type to stop listening to the loud mouths, and get to work.

 

208 thoughts on “More Prizes For Good Girls or a Letter from Sarah to the Political Goldfish – A Blast From The Past From March 2017

  1. Back in 1971, a young lady was engaged to a young Marine. Doing an argument, he hauled off and smacked her in the face – no love tap, full arm swing belt. She said “Goodbye” and walked out. Six weeks before their scheduled wedding. He tried to get her to forgive him. His parents tried. Her local friends tried. Hell, HER parents tried. Her consistent answer “Nobody gets a chance to hit me twice.” Eventually, the social pressure got to the point she left the East Coast, and went to stay with some friends at an apartment they shared in LA. Shortly thereafter, she married the single guy in the apartment. It’s a rebound relationship, so I don’t know if it will last, we’ve only been together for 48 years. My point is, in our circle, she did more to advance rejection of abuse of women than any twenty demonstrations or marches. And I doubt if our daughters would get hit even the first time. The guy that pulled back a hand to swing would get a jab to the nose first.

      1. Yeah, smarter than I am. But I’m a lot smarter than that other Marine that drove her away. For 4 dozen years, I never had to watch my back, cause she always had it. But that’s how playing life as a doubles team sport is supposed to work.

            1. Or use ∞ thusly: ∞

              When in doubt, just a search for ‘html [whatever]’ usually provides an answer.

            1. The only way to figure us out special characters like me, Orvan, Drak and the Beautiful But Evil Space Princess is to go mad, mad, Mad!

        1. What a lovely way to characterize a marriage – team doubles. Not necessarily equal, but working together for a common goal. And, having each other’s back.

    1. Couple more years, and you can assume that you are at least tolerable… (Grin).

      Trained my two to strike lower down first, then vacate. (Dad and younger Marine brother will then ensure that other Marine requests an urgent station transfer. At least.)

  2. International Women’s Day sounds like a great excuse for a bunch of guys to get together over beers and talk about all the women they’ve known over the years.

    A Toast! To all the women we know, the good, the bad, and the ugly. The ones we’ve had, the ones we wish we’d had, the ones we wish we hadn’t had, the ones that wouldn’t have anything to do with us, the ones that decided we were their Ones, and our daughters who are half our contribution to the future, if we have any. (and yes, that last was deliberately ambiguous.) /wink
    SKOL!

      1. I’ll drink to that too!
        (Any excuse for a drink. You’d think I was an alcoholic if you didn’t know my limit was usually just one beer a night, at most.)

  3. Any time I get asked to sign a petition or come to a gathering or talk to show support for “women’s rights” I ask, “What rights am I currently missing? What, by law, am I not allowed to do because I’m a woman?” I never really get a coherent answer. Some focus on abortion and the few states enacting laws. My response is to point out that Roe v. Wade is the law of the land and therefore abortions are still available, especially if one travels. Then I’m told that poor women can’t afford to travel. I say, so start a non-profit that arranges transport for those women. Then I get yelled at.

    1. They have won the war, but they can’t stop fighting the battles. Somehow, being ‘oppressed’ has become essential to their self-image.

      Funny how they can’t be bothered to actually do anything resembling work for their Great And Noble Cause, only make demands of what other people have to do.
      ———————————
      Susan Ivanova: “I do not like Santiago. I’ve always thought that a leader should have a strong chin. He has no chin, and his vice-president has several. This to me is not a good combination.”

      1. If they declare victory and go home, what will they do with themselves? Why they might have to do stuff to deem themselves good.

    2. Big deal. I’m denied abortion too. You don’t see me protesting, do you?
      But I’m a man you say? Well isn’t THAT a sexist comment?
      I’m being absurd? Au contraire, who’s taxes are paying for these procedures, eh?

      1. Julian Castro did mention that transwomen (i.e. people born with male plumbing) need “reproductive justice”, which is typically a code phrase for abortion rights.

        1. “Yes, transwomen have the right to kill all of the children that gestate in their nonexistent wombs.”

          … except we now have successful uterine transplants.

          ~Never mind! ~

          No abortion for anyone!

      2. On the “right” to abortion, the couple of times I have been approached, I ask “Where is the petition to allow the father to decide to eliminate the ‘mass of tissue’ and eschew the ‘burden’ of raising a child?”

        1. While glad it works, I dislike that because it has the weakness of accepting their unstated assumptions.

          Their stated assumption is ‘her body, her choice’.

          So, they can dismiss it by pointing out the man’s body isn’t involved in physical support of the child, and once the child is born there’s no right to abortion.

          The problem is that ‘her body, her choice’ means that someone who sets up a situation where an infant MUST depend on them to merely survive then goes ‘oh hey, this is asking too much. I should be able to kill them to stop the demand.’

          Morally the same as me putting up a sign that says “free tours!” to my basement, locking it, and then demanding a right to starve anyone down there to death because it’s too much of a burden.

          1. Ah! But the man’s body IS involved in physical support of the child. That’s been proven in just about every child support court case.

            1. They don’t consider financial support to be physical support.

              And, frankly, it isn’t. As Sarah has pointed out, you can’t actually force people to support a kid. Just punish them if they don’t.

              Heck, remember that infamous “man ruled to be dead when he’s standing there” case? The bastard walked off on his wife and kids, worked off the books for the next 40 years, and then tried to force his abandoned wife to pay back the social security she’d gotten after that so he could retire on SS?

              Even that isn’t forcing the guy to support the child that he helped create.

              Innocent put into a deadly situation, then going “hey, not my problem.”

              It’s punishing him for failure to do so.

      1. That is my usual response since most of these questions are asked by the smiling zombies on the sidewalk downtown. I only get to use this with unwary students and colleagues, or in a general discussion with friends. And, yes, they’re still friends because they will admit, at least between the two of us, that I’m not wrong. But, they’re not comfortable admitting that they’re being taken for a ride (or in Sarah’s words, coming out of the political closet, even to me).

        1. they’re not comfortable admitting that they’re being taken for a ride

          Discomfort is the most rational response. Most people get very angry when they discover they’re being conned. Usually at the people running the con, but for cons on belief systems the rage usually is directed at the person being Aristotle’s Gnat.

  4. International Women’s Day (and its many ilk) is an example of people throwing a parade and claiming they’ve contributed, in their way, just as much to earn that victory as those who served in the foxholes.

    Which is why the “holiday” fills your nostrils with the rank odor of barnyard.

  5. The wonderwomen of 50-70 years ago got there through overcoming considerable opposition. Today, women who listen to the world get participation trophies because plumbing.

    I’m expecting determined and exceptional women to end up a distinct minority for the next generation or two.

    -Albert

    1. Exceptional women were, are, and always will be a distinct minority. That is sort of what exceptional means.

    2. And respecting them, respecting my grandmother’s generation (and I’m old enough to have grandkids myself even if I don’t yet) would require NOT acting like they were utter failures at it.

      1. Admitting their deeds means that modern women can’t be the first ones to do it. So every generation of feminists invents some reason why the previous generation didn’t _really_ do it.

        -Albert

        1. You get people bragging of new and innovative ideas about gender in stories. If you don’t censor history, you get people saying, I don’t think it was truly NEW when E.E. “Doc” Smith did it.

        2. My maternal grandmother was a doctor. Being that she died in 1999 of an accident at the age of… late eighties, she was born in the early 1900s and never treated her having had a career as a doctor as something extremely special. She was one of those quiet but strong personalities. So it’s rather hard for me to believe whenever I hear about the oppressed women of the past and 1950s, etc.

          1. Shadow, the question that has to be asked when talking that far back:

            Was “doctor” what she did, or was it a “title” granted by licensing, diploma, etc. My grandfather was a welder because it was what he did; he wasn’t certified until much later.

            1. Was “doctor” what she did, or was it a “title” granted by licensing, diploma, etc. My grandfather was a welder because it was what he did; he wasn’t certified until much later.

              Exactly. Both grandmothers were teachers until a “teaching school certificate” was required. Neither could take the time or afford the fees when it became required.

              Great-Great-Great Grandfather was a surveyor. Pretty sure he apprenticed, didn’t go to school, beyond one room schoolhouse.

              Most people didn’t see doctors beyond mom/grandma/herbalist/midwife, except maybe in bigger cities, even in Europe, until I’d guess, early 1900’s, unless you were in the military. What was the saying “hospitals were where you went to die.”

            2. It was what she did. Medical doctor. I don’t know what her specialty was, as she seemed to be an all-round family doctor, GP, and some surgery (given that this was the rural provinces of the Philippines…it didn’t surprise me really) and she would also deliver babies. From the stories of her youth, she would study in Manila and return to her home province for visits every now and again. I remember her still working when I was a little kid, and remember her giving me immunization shots (and the big needles and the glass syringes!!!), though my memory is vague whether she worked at a clinic or a small hospital (probably was both?)

              1. Yeah, there was never any question about whether women could “do the job” in many fields; getting the gatekeepers to admit it…….

                1. My Mamang was a GP “but was a cardiologist,” according to my Mom. So I guess that means she ended up as a GP but was trained as a cardiologist. And probably was unofficially trained in the ‘In case you end up with a patient who needs your help for X,Y, and Z reasons.’ Because provincial rural doctor. She probably also did circumcisions and a bunch of other things on top of it all.

    3. There is a certain brand of car that Mom and Dad Red will never buy. Because way back when, they were about to sign the papers for one. At the time, Dad was finishing up his military service, and Mom had a “real job” already. The salesman looked at the loan papers, saw Mom’s income, Dad’s, and blurted, “No woman should earn more than her husband!”

      Dad looked at Mom, she looked back. He reached across the desk, picked up the contract, ripped it to shreds, and they walked out. (Mom was one of the first women in her technical field, because at the time it was brand new. It is still heavily male, “because math and physics.”)

      1. I don’t imagine that anyone unable to grok the inappropriateness of blurting that out was much better up to that point either. The event has “the last straw” written all over it.

            1. A tractor dealership lost any chance of doing business with us when the salescreature admitted to tossing a deal for a very expensive tractor over a $100 delivery charge. The fact that he insisted that we *had* to buy what he had in stock rather than the considerably less expensive model we needed was the finishing touch. Never set foot on their property again, and I doubt he knew why.

              1. Some years ago Ma & Pa went car shopping and settled on something. The salesman was asked, to be sure, that the final price was the FINAL price – no hidden charges to pop up later. That was confirmed. The next day, when it was time to final things… a $50 charge “showed up.” Pa walked away with the salesman whining that he couldn’t believe someone would walk out because of “only” 50 dollars. Pa’s reply was, “No. YOU lost a sale because of ‘only’ 50 dollars.”

                1. “This is proof you lied about the final price. How can I trust you aren’t lying about everything else? Goodbye.”

  6. > equality

    That’s entirely due to the Industrial Revolution. Which was, not to put too fine a point on it, entirely the work of a handful of British, German, and a few other Western Dead White Males.

    Without that technological boot to the posterior, wymyn would still be stuck in the same place they’d always been, because no matter how Woke they wanted to be, they were stuck there by biology, not be Patriarchic Oppression.

    You want the heroes of women’s equality? That’s Abraham Darby, James Watt, Richard Trevithick, and the others that remade the world into a place where women could actually *have* equality.

    1. Don’t forget Samuel Colt. “Frankie and Johnny” would work so well if Frankie had to use her fists, or a sword.

      1. And Thomas Edison. And the developers of home-based refrigeration technology. And the washing machine. Without all that, we’d be too exhausted from housework to even think of demanding political equality.

        1. Well, many of those ladies fighting for political equality were upper-middle class or lower-upper class.

          IE These were women who could afford paid servants.

          Some of it for them was “lower class men can vote” so why shouldn’t us socially higher women vote?

        2. After watching the Witcher, I had about two days where I spent the whole time marveling over how easy it is to do things– cooking can be done with cans, meat from the freezer and no hauling of wood; laundry is a pain in the rump because we were clean clothes every single day; I went around sealing the leaks in the house because it was below zero and you could tell where they were…..

            1. My guess would be a lot of the differences are “do you play video games?”

              A lot of the styling is “oh my gosh, that character is TOTALLY a living video game character!”, like the ‘artist’ that is required for a major plot point.

              The love interest is insane and scary, with added creepy.

              Some of the sex stuff is over the top, although it definitely gets across the “hey, yeah, not right in the head?”

              Pretty much all of the magic users are evil, just to different degrees– ranging roughly lawful to chaotic stupid.

              And the timeline jumps around a lot to the point I was mostly lost, but it was fun enough to watch that I could deal with the “I have no idea what is going on” part and it did eventually clean up, mostly.

              There are probably also folks who dislike the times when I was jumping up and down laughing because it was EXACTLY LIKE A D&D CAMPAIGN.

              Oh, and a couple of the episodes I spent most of it snorting my drink, but it was largely dark humor.

              Also, I’m never going to be able to say “I brought you apple juice” without laughing again.

                1. The way my husband got me to even TRY watching the series, since I got serious GoT vibes off of the commercials:

                  Shared an interview the dude did with some video podcast guys.
                  Specifically, where the interviewer goes “Game of Thrones, or Harry Potter?”

                  And Cavill gets this gloriously polite but uncomfortable expression on his face, and says in a lovely Brit-flavored accent: “Lord of the Rings.”

                  It was as big of a “Wait, what?” as when I finally heard Marsters speak NOT as Spike-the-Vampire, and found out he’s got a Cali accent.

                  And reassured me it wasn’t another grimdark of the darkgrim of the I hate fantasy shows.

                1. I think I remember that. I never played Doom. My husband (and that’s long enough ago he might have been “boyfriend” when he played it) did play it. I remember thinking it was okay. I don’t think there had been any “game” movies before that came out.

                    1. (Replying to self because the posts I want to reply to don’t have a “Reply” button for some reason.)

                      I didn’t say anything about “Mortal Kombat”, which I agree was a fun movie (the sequels, not so much) that stayed more or less true to the spirit of the games, and didn’t take itself too seriously.

                      As for “Street Fighter”, watchable for Raul Julia, not so much the rest of the cast. 😛

                      “For you, the day Bison graced your village was the most important day of your life. But for me, it was Tuesday.”

                    2. Saw a description of the Mortal Kombat game: “It’s a bunch of kids playing with their toys. There’s a cop character. His special ability is “shoot.” Which he does. With a gun.”

            2. Oh, as far as the physique vs characterization of the Witcher? I prefer rather less on the sculpted barn door aspect, but inside of a few episodes I love the character, and dang that guy is a good actor to be able to sell that.

              1. The “plot” of the Witcher? (As scene on a few meme images posted on Twitter. Ladies definitely love the plot.) 😀

                1. Seriously, though, my poor husband has had to deal with my rolling my eyes at some of the more obvious fan service.
                  He finds it adorable that it’s supposed to be a Big Beefcake All Women Eyes Here thing, and I’m… blushing, rolling my eyes, and looking away, or critiquing the style.

                  1. A number of men have similar reactions when the cheesecake pandering becomes a bit much in what’s supposed to be non-porn, to be honest.

                    As far as Cavill goes, my face will never be declared Sexiest of the Year (which he got in 2013), and I’m a couple of inches shorter than him. But my chest is about as hairy and my shoulders are about as broad, so if I succeed in attaining fitness I should be in the ballpark.

                    Hopefully the kind of woman who’d make a good First Reader won’t be put off by that.

                    -Albert

                    1. My dear elf is….well, it’s considered a disgrace, so no comment.

                      But for me looking at him, more hair, less defined muscle, way more effective use.
                      Practical lady the same.

  7. I can think of ways that “international women’s day” might be useful– looking at stuff that only women can do, or even just recognizing “women’s work.” Basically Mother’s Day.

    But that would recognize that what women do tends to be less immediately impressive than guys– a load of hay bucked and stacked is a lot more impressive than, oh, using the tractor to stack it and making sure there’s food for between three and thirty-five people. (Actual example.)

    Recognize the strengths, celebrate them. Women’s ability to multi-task, men’s ability to laser-focus when there’s freakin’ bombs going off next to them….

    …but that is really not what they want for IWD, is it?

    It’s not about “this cool thing that is mostly female,” it’s she-woman man hater’s club. /sad

    1. Yep. This is more “women are such heroes because vagina!”
      Um…. rabbit hole: by diminishing motherhood, feminists have become obsessed with the vulva as the center of what they are. Because that’s the difference. Hence all the signs about how great their “vaginas” (they’re anatomically illiterate) are and the operations to beautify said parts.
      It’s bizarre but logical, if that’s the only thing they’re allowed to be proud of.

      1. I find it odd that the feminist hate femininity, and try to make the females look like boys.
        It’s also kind of ironic that it’s the men (drag queens and like) who are more into it than the supposed womyn’s champions.

        1. It is the immature girl’s assertion, “I’m just as good as the boys” as if that were something to aspire to. Boy’s are jerks, for the most part, even the nice ones, because they’re incapable of picking up on cues and nuances until they’re out of their Twenties (if then — dollars to doughnuts Harvey Weinstein really did believe he never raped anyone. He believes wrongly.)

          Your observation of irony reminds me of a time when Beloved Spouse & I did a pub crawl on Bourbon Street one Sunday afternoon, alternating bars and strip joints. The first strip joint was early afternoon and the strippers were clearly having a bawdy good time, even the drunk one. They knew what was going on, the patrons (what few we were) understood it and there was a lot of wink-wink feeling to it. Second joint had a center stage like a boxing ring with nymphets doing contortions and left us feeling soiled — the kind of place clearly marketing to dirty old men and slightly creepy.

          The third place was a hoot, a transvestite show with a carnival barker type guy at the entrance chanting about “Guys who want to be gals” and so on. Because the performers couldn’t wobble their boobs they had well-developed dance routines with flash and glamour and a fun attitude toward it all. They had studied their art and worked at it rather than simply falling into it and thus holding their audience in contempt.

      2. So, they celebrate their nominal femaleness as inherently superior, but loathe the one thing said femaleness can do better than any male….

        “Logic, logic, logic. I’m sick of your logic!”

        1. I AM MORE THAN JUST ONE ORGAN.

          Of course you are.

          “Reducing people to material parts is wrong.” – Jeffery Dahmer

          1. Dearie,

            You want me to pay attention to your face? It’s easy. Learn to have a conversation that isn’t littered with vapid left wing nitwittery. Prove that you serve some useful purpose other than being an aesthetically pleasing bag of ambulatory meat.

            Because I married a woman who weighs more then I do and comes up to my chin. Married her more then a third of a century ago. Because I fell in love with her MIND. With her wit. Two things, to quote JOHN WICK that you know very little about.

            So, if the only useful thing you can do with your mouth involves intimate contact, be prepared to have your mammary development started at.

            Now run along.

  8. I sympathize — my “donor” vein is small with much accumulated scar tissue and a tendency to roll when struck. It tends to phreak inexperienced phlebotomists. The experience is sometimes almost painless, usually only mildly painful. The one truly bad experience I think they nicked a nerve and I had mild neuropathy in my hand for a month or so.

    1. After a few gallons in my youth and a boatload of blood draws, my donor vein is vessel-non-grata. There’s another that is in good shape, but rolls more. One of these days, I’ll have to let them draw from my right arm.

      1. They’ve drawn out both arms. Wherever a vein presents itself. My veins are small & deeper. I’ve been told (after one painful session with a regular needle) to always request the small butterfly needles, the one used on babies & small children. I’ve had good people be successful immediately, but 95%, before the advice, it always took 2 or 3 attempts. Not fun.

        1. Ah similar to my arms. The veins were very flexible and tended to roll away. Thus it was hard to get the vein, and when you got it the vacuum in the tubes tended to cause the vein to shut. The worst I ever had was when my wife (then Fiancee) and I went to get the blood tests for our wedding license (which CT then still required). I did not yet have a GP so we went to a clinic like some of the modern urgent care places. It took 6 tries to get the required blood from me with the nurse finally getting the doctor who drew it with a butterfly from a vein on the back of my hand and using low vacuum tubes meant for infants. Three weeks later for the wedding my arms were still bruised. It was good I wore long sleeves or they might have thought my wife to be was beating me :-). I do joke with my wife that that action shows my devotion to her as I underwent torture to get married :-).

          1. Three weeks later for the wedding my arms were still bruised. It was good I wore long sleeves or they might have thought my wife to be was beating me 🙂

            Good thing Oregon didn’t require blood tests in ’78. I wore short sleeve wedding dress (mom’s, that she wore in ’55). I bruise easily at the best of times. Gotten worse as I got older.

            Luckily my “excuse” for most bruises are “Darn if I know” or “Dang, Where did that come from?” 🙂 Lately it is, on my arms, or legs, anyway “Didn’t listen to the dog, she got insistent.” Also known as intelligent disobedience. She paws for alerts. Never used the “ran into a door”, “I fell”, the standard ones. It was interesting when I worked in the woods. Brush is brutal & difficult to avoid on the west side of the Cascades, I always had various bruises.

            Don’t know if they used the low vacuum tubes or not. Don’t think they did. Also don’t think blood draw is suppose to hurt during the actual draw. It did this last time. Only one stick to get the vein. But the actual draw of the two small vials for the tests, hurt. Will remember to mention that next round.

            1. Ok the draw itself should normally not hurt. The initial stick will hurt (little pinch my tuckus) . If they fish around to get the positioning right that may hurt a ot as the needle knocks into and pokes stuff. But unless they’re still fiddling (to keep a vein open for example) the draw should add no additional pain. Although if they were sufficiently aggressive there may still be leftover pain and perhaps the entrance site still hurts from
              the needle’s initial penetration of the skin? Switching the tubes if they’re doing more than one might cause the needle to move. A butterfly with it’s considerably smaller gauge needle and physical isolation from the tube switch might help.

              1. A butterfly with it’s considerably smaller gauge needle and physical isolation from the tube switch might help.

                They used the butterfly needle. Didn’t touch my arm or the needle location, just the tube attached to the needle when switching the two tubes (small ones thankfully). It definitely hurt during the draw part. Definite difference after needle inserted, before first tube, during tube switch, & after last tube, before they pulled the needle. Don’t know why. Just know it did. I mean the pain was like a 4 on the scale, bearable, definitely there.

    1. I think Nancy, Chuck and the Mainstream Media may have — or at least, on why Constitutional rights are important. Nothing so impresses upon a person the importance of Due Process as being guest of honor at a lynching.

    2. If so, it’s probably not the NRA. Wayne LaPierre is the one who met with him and told him banning “bump stocks” was a fine idea. Then they tried to make it look like it was his idea.

      After being burned once by them, hopefully he won’t be fooled again.

        1. Totally unrelated to anything but a name similarity, has anybody seen our Wayne around?

          I’ve been kind of MIA so maybe I’ve just misremembered not seeing him….

          1. Hi! I’m just terrible at managing time and let social media like Facebook steal my life away. I keep meaning to come back here more often, because I like the discussion here, but I’m always finding that the day has been frittered away before I do.

            Thanks for thinking of me, though. The company I worked for recently went through a merger and I got RiFed, so I’m looking for work, but I have a decent severance coming and there are jobs to be had. Other than that, I’m doing fine.

      1. Virginia (and the country as a whole) just went through one of the most important 2A related events in its history: the formation of a decentralized force somewhere between a corps and an army in size, by citizens protesting their tyrannical government. With zero accidents.

        Where was the NRA in all of this? Talking about how willing they were to compromise.

        I’m sure there are decent people in the NRA in the lower echelons. I hope they get out before Virginians decide to burn NRA HQ to the ground.

  9. The 19th Amendment was passed by a majority of men. Ratified by state governments composed entirely of men. Signed by Woodrow Wilson. (Hey, he did at least one thing right) A majority of men who believed that women should have the right to vote. Men were their allies, not their enemies.

    I’m not belittling the women of the suffrage movement. They brought the issue to everybody’s attention and demonstrated that women were being treated unfairly. They did not condemn all men as misogynistic monsters that should be booted out of polite society. That wouldn’t have gotten them anywhere they wanted to go. They endured some nasty backlash from the few men that were misogynistic assholes, as did some of the men who supported women’s rights. Praise them all, women and men alike, for winning the good fight.

    Shine the spotlight on Iran, on Afghanistan, on all the places in the world where a woman can get killed for talking back. Name, shame, denounce. Strip the mask for those who apologize for those regimes even among us — many of them “liberal” — and make them own the horrible things they’re allowing to be done.

    And include Albania, Chechnya, a lot of Eastern Europe, former Soviet territories, and Asia, places where sex slavery is rampant. ‘Taken’ was not a fairy tale; it was a dramatization of an evil that takes place every day, right in the middle of ‘enlightened’ Europe. But it is so much easier (and safer) for the ‘woke’ scolds to shake their fingers at us.

    Would that there really was a Kildar, and a mountain warrior tribe, to clean out those hellholes.
    ———————————
    They say I can’t be a nonconformist because I’m not like the other nonconformists.

    1. Mike Harman, the Kildar, is a just possibly real hero. If you wanted to become him, you could probably do it. Or you could aspire to be even better.
      And yes, I was a Boy Scout once upon a time.

      1. Once a Boy Scout always a Boy Scout, registered or not. Looks down. Well Scout anyway. (Girls Scouts growing up. BSA leader while son was in BSA & earning Eagle. Still counts.)

    2. . They did not condemn all men as misogynistic monsters that should be booted out of polite society.

      Well, mostly.

      There were some serious crazies, too.

      They just didn’t get control of the narrative– even though some of the folks who objected did so based on the very loud crazies.

    3. I am currently agnostic on the virtue of expanding suffrage to women, since in the U. S. at least, women could always run for office (and win).

      But assuming it was a good thing for women qua women, your point is valid: It only happened because of men. The female contribution to that effort was various forms of jumping up and down – some very uncomfortable and a few even dangerous – to get the attention of the men in charge: Gimmee! And really, what other option (again assuming the end is desirable) did those women have viz that particular goal?

      And it worked

      No doubt this is why it is the preferred model for the suffragettes’s political heirs today, for everything, and anything they want.

      Embarrassing, and sad. Hence the agnosticism.

    4. >> “The 19th Amendment was passed by a majority of men. Ratified by state governments composed entirely of men. Signed by Woodrow Wilson. (Hey, he did at least one thing right)”

      Woodrow Wilson? I was under the impression that only the legislative branch got a say in constitutional amendments.

      1. Correct. POTUS has no Constitutional function in the amendment process.

        Now, Wilson might have signed the certification of its passage, but only as a witness – I know that both Johnson and Nixon did that for the amendments passed during their administrations. Those, however, were “photo-ops.”

        1. This. Requiring signing by POTUS could imply the possibility of a Presidential veto, which is very much not the point.

      1. College, University of Redacted, circa 1972, late fall. Blue jeans below the waist, OD Army jacket above.

        It got a little more varied in winter; a few Pea jackets and Air Force parkas in the mix.

  10. “Look, one person, any sex, any race, any age, dead by violence is one too many”

    I love you, Milady host, but I have to object here. There are far too many categories of person for which one dead is far too few.

      1. I am a very nasty man. While I approve of a woman shooting a would-be rapist, I extend my approval to people killed by their own vicious stupidity; as when that group of Weather Underground twits laminated themselves over their basement walls with they bomb they were building.

        1. Oh, I’m a big fan of the Darwin Awards. I can’t stand those pretentious twits praising each other’s WOKE!ness at the Oscars, but I’d totally watch the Charlies!

        1. Last one I knew got taken down because of false witness on Facebook– it was put out as parody, and actual supporters snagged on to it as good, and got embarrassed.

            1. Gun banners; anti-self-defense folks; one death by violence is one too many. (no insult to Sarah, she was speaking sensibly, not in the ludicrous absolutes sense)

              Some of the folks who believe gun violence is the worst violence were re-sharing “rape lasts a minute, murder last a lifetime” in all seriousness.

                1. The dividing line…. hell if I know where it is, anymore.

                  Back when I first saw the image? I thought it was a nasty joke.

                  No way that would do anything insult folks, right? It wouldn’t make someone go “Oh, damn, hadn’t thought of that.”

                  ….

                  And then… folks started going “hey, that’s a great point… don’t kill the rapist.”

                  1. The gun community has been dealing with the whole “self-defense is vigilante justice without a trial” arguments like this forever. Yes, this is an argument being made seriously.

                    1. And we should consider de-criminalizing vigilante killings to the same extent that we consider drug legalization, and other criminal justice ‘reforms’. And mass killings of all known offenders, or of currently incarcerated persons.

                      By that, I mean I see serious, prohibitive downsides to legalizing vigilante killings, but the ‘reforms’ advocated or implemented by the hard core activists are also not optimal.

              1. I think Neil Peart said it all:

                I didn’t know the girl, but I knew her family
                All their lives were shattered
                In a nightmare of brutality
                They try to carry on, try to bear the agony
                Try to hold some faith
                In the goodness of humanity

                Not a bunch of vacuum-skulled yammerheads that don’t have a clue.

          1. Thanks. Missed that particular kerfuffle.

            Of course I don’t consider killing a rapist as murder. Even if after the fact and not during the commission of, or prevention of a rape.

            I understand why a civilized society has to have laws to ensure the actual guilty person is punished and why we can’t go around shooting rapists and such after the fact without due process that protects my rights and the rights of my family.

            Having government employees perform those duties to (attempt to) remove emotional reactions and help ensure impartiality is a good thing. (at least that’s the goal, but we do have humans involved…).

            1. I always thought that the sentence for Rape should be – turned over to the Raped and friends for 12 hours. The rapist left with them spread on a frame, hands and feet tied to the corners. If he was still alive at the end he was set free, his punishment complete.

              1. No. just no. NO crime is so vile as to have to endure the company of Alyssa Milano for more than six hours at a time.

      1. My mother used to say “It takes all kinds to make a world.” My personal take on that thought is “Yes, but did it ever strike you that the PROPORTIONS were off?”

        1. Classically there were three defenses against a charge of murder:

          1. I didn’t do it.
          2. I did it but it was not murder.
          3. He needed killing.

          1. There are four kinds of Homicide: felonious, excusable, justifiable, and praiseworthy.

            – Ambrose Bierce

        2. Violent criminals have made a conscious choice to consider their crimes more important than the lives of innocent people. Now, innocent lives are definitely not worth less than the lives of violent criminals. Therefore, the criminals’ lives are less important than their crimes, by their own twisted values.
          ———————————
          Wing: ”Have you ever heard the phrase, Living well is the best revenge?”
          Miles: “Where I come from, someone’s head in a bag is generally considered the best revenge.”

      1. WPDE especially when using a tablet. My +1 was addressed to There are far too many categories of person for which one dead is far too few.. Not that I am disagreeing with anything said in the other replies.

  11. There’s a big market for being able to pretend to Do Something without actually really doing anything.
    Marching on International Womyn’s Day is easier than working at a woman’s shelter. Changing your profile pic for the environmentalist hip cause of the moment is a lot easier than cleaning up the litter that follows any kind of ecomentalist rally. Social media virtue signaling about how you care so hard is way easier than actually going out to actually care for other people.
    Of course, the excuse comes up that they will vote hard to make a perfect system that will eliminate all these problems- basically take other people’s money so other other people can show all the care and compassion that government employees & nursing home staff are so famous for.
    They’re just lazy, cheap bastards.

  12. ‘International (insert noun) Day’ is an excuse for the kind of parasites that work in the United Nations and assorted NGOs to preen and distracts the productive from asking is the parasites actually ACCOMPLISH anything.

  13. Those pushing for “international this and that” might be well advised to actually read the lyrics of “The Internationale”

    Workers, peasants, we are
    The great party of labourers.
    The earth belongs only to men;
    The idle will go to reside elsewhere.

    I doubt very much that those pushing this are workers, peasants, laborers, men, or other than idle — they are pushing a movement which sees them as first on the chopping block.

    1. The Progressive Intellectual Ninnies have been studiously ignoring that nearly the first thing that happens in any Socialist/Communist revolution is the studied liquidation of the Intellectual class for longer than I’ve been alive. The stupidity is stunning. Not unusual for the Ninnies, mind, but still stunning.

      1. “This time we’ll get it right!” A phrase that should inspire more chills (and either fleeing or reaching for weapons) than pretty much any other phrase in the English language.

        1. Progressives Lefties hate, Hate, HATE any hint oft American Exceptionalism…right up until the moment that somebody is pointing out that many other countries have tried their Socialist solutions, and flailed.

          1. tried their Socialist solutions, and flailed.


            I can’t decide whether that’s a typo or not, so I have to ask. Both ‘failed’ and ‘flailed’ are appropriate. The poor folks who had to live under socialism certainly felt flailed.

  14. Relevant to the question of “authenticity” of minorities, I found this statement by Clarence Thomas today:

    “you’re not really black because you’re not doing what we expect black people to do.”

    From Created Equal: Clarence Thomas in His Own Words, arriving in theatres (although probably not near you) next Friday.

    1. What the SJW’s are not saying:

      You’re just an ignorant African-American. You can’t know what it means to be black; we have to tell you. You can’t succeed without ‘help’ from The Right People.

  15. Damn. Just when you think Trump couldn’t get any more racist and sexist, this turns up!

    You’ll notice Trump only shakes hands with White male firefighters!

    1. What gets me is the tweet says nothing about the ability to tan of the firemen, or the genders.

      Oh wait. Now I get it. All people who fight fires, urban or wild, are white male firefighters. Sorry.

  16. Whenever I look at some grand newly-concocted holiday, or some other token effort for any cause, presented as all amazing and inspirational, I can’t help but think of a definition of “genius” I once read: Someone who voices the same opinions as yours, but more eloquently.

    To that effect, these token efforts aren’t meant to resolve the stated problem, or help the cause in any actual way, but merely to give its proponents a nice little adrenaline spike. They’re to give their opinions a louder voice, make them feel like they’re on the winning side, so they can go about their daily life without otherwise changing anything. Because an actual change would be scary, and inconveniencing, and may even remove the aforementioned regular dose of adrenaline. I’ve referred to this phenomenon as reminiscent of Münchhausen Syndrome-by-proxy, but it can just as easily be classified as a form of addiction, a need to feel superior than both the stated victims of oppression, and the claimed villains who are to blame for it.

    Fittingly, what shows the true colors of such social justice junkies, is that whenever their token efforts are critiqued by some of these stated victims – in this case, women who aren’t impressed by artificial holidays cooked up by the local socialist party – their attitude invariably switches to the same kind of dismissive condescension that’s the actual basis for inequality. You can’t be a woman, see, and not celebrate. Or, while we’re at it, not support abortion; or not vote for Hillary… In general, while apparently the jury’s still out on gender, your opinions have definitely already been assigned at birth, according to your biology. Having any of your own devising would be, well, sexist, mmkay?

  17. Catching up on reading put aside for contemplation, I found this Roger Scruton quote

    Art turned its back on beauty. It became a slave to the consumer culture feeding our pleasures and addictions and wallowing in self-disgust. That it seems to me is the lesson of the ugliest forms of art and architecture. They do not show reality, but take revenge on it.

    Art as we knew it required knowledge, competence, discipline, and study, all of which were effective reminders of the adult world.

    in a recent Mark Steyn column. It seems appropriate to much of what we have discussed here at A2H.

    A little further in the same column he notes the passing of Elizabeth Wurtzel, probably best known as author of Prozac nation (Steyn notes that was her editor’s title; she wanted it called I Hate Myself and I Want to Die.) Dismissing her as “a prose stylist of some talent but with little interest in anything but herself” Steyn does credit her with one perceptive observation with which I suspect many Huns would agree:

    ‘President Clinton stood before the Palestinian National Council and spoke of two profoundly emotional experiences in less than 24 hours. One of these was his meeting with the children of jailed Palestinian Arab terrorists. The other experience was meeting Israelis, some little children whose fathers had been killed in the conflict with Palestinians.’

    No such meeting ever took place. As Elizabeth Wurtzel observed in her book Bitch, Bill Clinton ‘has made being full of sh*t not just a mere peccadillo, but in fact the greater part of his personality’.

    Considering nobody likely knew that better than his long-suffering wife I am tempted to feel some slight sympathy for Mrs. Rodham-Clinton … except that I perceive the yoking of the pair as apt as any torment reported by Dante.

    1. Art turned its back on beauty.

      This sentence is the most compact distillation of what all the gatekept expertly curated popular arts industries have achieved of late:

      The SF publishing world moved away from publishing any of that plebeian stuff that actually sells, instead working to accumulate meaningless wokeness points for the next industry conference session on “Our appeal is becoming more selective!”;

      CBS, headed by a guy who fundamentally hates Star Trek, nevertheless greenlights and produces the much anticipated ST:Discovery, which at it’s core also fundamentally hates Star Trek. By imperfectly aping the forms and vocabulary while actively countering and contradicting the immense canon that makes up what the actual consumers of Star Trek would watch, they divide the fan base and acheieve very disappointing viewership for the CBS All Access streaming subscription service the ST:D was supposed to anchor. And from rumors they seem set to do that same exact thing again with Picard, even though the corporate seas have changed drastically – reportedly Shari Redstone, new ultimate overlord at the top of the recombined CBS/Viacom and the one whose knife is till stuck in Les Moonves, is a fan of Star Trek and sees it as IP crown jewels, but Picard was under weigh before the takeover and remerger…;

      and Disney let one inadequately supervised woke executive manage to kill off the wildly popular primary intellectual property for which they paid George Lucas $4.05 billion – Star Wars only has one tiny thread of popularity left in The Mandalorian, but the movies are pretty much dead.

      If any art is beautiful and appreciated and popular, the woke must poop all over it like aisle 9 at the North Beach Safeway closest to Nancy Pelosi’s house – as per Scruton’s quote above,

      They do not show reality, but take revenge on it.

      **
      Also, has anyone heard from our Space Princess hostess?

      1. However it has zero to do with the commercial side, and everything to do with virtue signaling, where virtue equals Marxism.
        And thank you, I’m okay. Yesterday was one of those days which would be “fine” if it had led to anything productive. which it didn’t. ARGH.

    2. Granny Maojackets von Pantsuit Clinton Has all of her husband’s ‘I can do whatever I want’ arrogance and amorality and none of his (admittedly skeevy) charm. She has all of his criminal instincts combined with about two thirds of his smarts. The one in that family that I genuinely feel sorry for is Chelsea. With those two for parents, the kid never had a chance. Oh, maybe if when she went away to college she had dons a runner and changed her name and here face, but that would have been veery hard and she probably didn’t have the resources even assuming she ever had the impulse. I suspect the only reason Chelsea’s vampiric mother isn’t having Chelsea’s brain excised and replaced with her own is lack of medical technology. The poor little bitch is going to be a puppet for her decaying mother’s political (and criminal) ambitions until the day Mummy Dearest shuffles of this mortal coil, and will probably be so deep in whatever crap Shrillary was dealing that she’ll never get loose.

Comments are closed.