The Collective

Posted on by Sarah A. Hoyt

Guys, for those of you out there who aren’t female, women, people of vaginitude I bring you strange and wild news: We’re not a collective. We don’t share a brain. there isn’t a central brain sending signals through the nervous system. We don’t know when some woman somewhere is doing something utterly stupid. And we can’t stop the pudding heads, let alone the outright criminals from doing whatever the hell they want.

My reaction to the feminists calling me a gender traitor was to hold my middle fingers aloft, because i never swore allegiance to my vagina, or promised to support all women. My reaction to the people (and mostly AIs, though there is a large component of foreigners too) claiming that somehow, by being born with a vagina I AM loyal to other women above all, and therefore unfit for a free society is precisely the same. These are my middle fingers. Behold, they are a matched set.

And yes, before you ask, I said the same thing to the feminist idiots when they were demanding that — somehow — men control feral rapists who attack women. I pointed out men aren’t a collective being and the decent have no power to control the scum.

Guys… I’m tired. I haven’t fallen down the stairs — again — and I actually pseudo-took the day off today. Pseudo? Well, yes. You see, tomorrow I have to go back and finish packing the rest of the other house. We brought essential functions only over here, and Dan stays here, because he has a regular job (le 9 to 5 as the French say) but I got back tomorrow morning very early (taking the laptop, yes) and spend the rest of the week packing up stuff we didn’t get to. Mostly the (still half packed) library, but also the office closet (supplies) and the kitchen machines (waffle maker and the like) and … stuff like that. I didn’t go back today very early, because if I didn’t take a day “off” I was going to crash and burn. Except that I need to pack clothes for the week, and I was all out, so I had to unpack my dresser and closet. Still less than I’ve one, and not to the “my back hurts so much I can’t stand” point.

When I hit twitter and facebook, the last thing I want to see is the usual “right wing” people falling for the psy-ops yet again.

What psy-ops you ask as if you had just landed here from another planet.

Has any of you — any single one of you — asked why the Clancy murder got big on national news right now? Has anyone seen if her supporters in front of the courthouse are even local? Or if they’re being paid? Has anyone actually paid attention to how wide spread even awareness of her crime is far from the area? Among the not terminally on line? Because I hate to tell you, but even in office-water-cooler chat, women might appear to support her who simply know nothing of the situation and just heard that “some mom who was depressed killed her kids, and now evil people want her killed/condemned.”

Because most people are NOT terminally on line like the rest of us. And some of the ones who aren’t get pablum from their MSM.

All of which boils down to: Don’t you think the talk about removing women’s right to vote, or basically every civil liberty and sticking us back in harems or worse is… a little premature?

Don’t you think it’s weird that this trial is nationalized just when the left has lost heart and doesn’t know if their new bold socialism will fly? Don’t you think it might be just slightly psy-ops? (… psssst. It’s a psy-ops.)

The left knows people are scared of the socialists (a lot of them Arabs) and want the right to start behaving like they are sure the right actually is. They want people on the right to post things so stupid and so anti-female that the undecided normies go “Oh, it’s true, they’re all anti woman” and line up to vote for the socialists. And Muslims. And Muslim socialists.

And some number of dumb bunnies fall for the online screeching and pointing, and start repeating the talking points the psy-ops hands them.

<Pinches bridge of nose. No. Not every “civilized society” restricted women and treated them as subhuman. Unless you consider that most forms of “civilization” before the existence of the United States were in fact the type of thing where EVERYONE save for a small minority was held in horrible conditions, had no rights and was treated as subhuman. Which is true. So, yeah, they restricted women. And men. And people who had to look under their tunic to remember what they were. And small children. And large children.

And there is no correlation between how repressed/held in subhuman status women are and civilization. No, wait, there is no POSITIVE relation. The best place to study this would probably be Africa, first because more cultures, due to tribes, and second because if I remember my readings correctly the status of women runs the gamut. OTOH we can all agree that Africa should always be written, in Mike Resnick’s evocative phrase “poor fucked up Africa” so, let’s leave that alone, okay?

That gone, what do we have? Well, beyond the US, until recently Great Britain was — after the US — a beacon of progress and decent lifestyle. At their peak, too, they had some of the most freedom for women in the world (whatever the die away feminists tell you in their gothic romances.) And yet, they were innovating, creating, and massively wealthy compared to everyone else.

At the other end we have Muslim countries. I don’t want to hear peep one about how women want to be covered up in bad slip covers and be forbidden from participating in any public life, and how if they get raped you have to kill them because it’s somehow their fault. Muslim countries, by and large, have a horrible record on human rights in general and their treatment of women in particular. If the screamers online were right that women are the cause of the downfall of civilizations, well, hell, Islam would be charging into the future at speed, wouldn’t it? And everyone would be happy and joyous there. They would be a model for us, in the West.

No, they aren’t. Though I bet if you challenge some of the accounts demanding we cancel the 19th ammendment, they will tell you they are because… tada, any number of them are Muslims, foreign and domestic, longing for the “beauty” of Sharia law.

You know their motives, and the language tics and behavior of 95% of them give it away if you look at what else they post. (Kind of like if someone is screaming bloody anti-Semitism nine times out of ten they are from Russia.)

Look, this is a problem of social media. it’s global. And other places bring their rats in the head and display it for us.

There are also any number of AI adding to the screeching. Because Russia would really really like it if the left were in power and appeasing them again. Heck, for all I know Mexican cartels are throwing money at this because they’d prefer the anti-American left in power and letting them move in. For all I know gay-Bolivian-opera singers are in on this, looking for the sweet USaid money again!

What we don’t need are local pudding heads and idiots adding tot he clamor.

Are women more leftist than men? I don’t know. And neither do you. Our statistical sampling is shit. So is our voting. All we know is how SOME women answer the polls and you know what, some of us have fun with that. Wait. We don’t even know that, since I garandamntee that some of those respondents are made up out of whole cloth.

Dear Bob (Heinlein) we don’t even know how many women there are, not really, since a favorite trick of illegals is to have a woman borrow kids and collect welfare for a bunch of kids that don’t exist, some number of which are female. And that’s without counting how many women come in illegally and leave. Or whatever. We don’t know how many PEOPLE there are or how many of those are women.

The perception that all women are liberal comes from the fact that for the last 50? 60? years it’s been dangerous to declare yourself non-leftist in public. Because the left will straight up hurt you in every way they can. Women are more vulnerable and weaker. Not only aren’t they going to declare they’re not leftist, they might mask and claim to be leftist. Hell, I did for years because it was a condition of being employed, and I was socially sensitive enough to intuit that.

How many women think child murder is acceptable? Probably some number, because women are individuals and law of averages, some individuals will be criminal, evil or just plain crazy. But you have no way of figuring out how many women, in possession of the facts actually support a familial murderess. There might be some number that think they support Clancy because they’re misinformed. And some that SAY they support Clancy because the MSM and psy ops on social media have created the impression this is what “everyone” is doing. And women, again, are afraid to step out on their own.

Add to it that the last three generations of women have been heavily propagandized that “you have to support all women” and that we’re some kind of bizarre sisterhood, and yeah, some women, who apparently were born unable to just hold their middle fingers aloft, will cave to the pressure.

But the way out of that is to point out again and again that we’re not a collective being. This horrible person who did horrible things might have a vagina (presumably, since she had kids) and I have a vagina, but I suspect that’s all we ever had in common. I don’t support child murderers.

It’s not to pile on with the Sharia-lovers and bots and claim that for the sake of civilization women must be reduced to the status of domestic animals.

Because a) psyops are never for your own good. b) falling for this psy ops will scare the idiots into thinking the right is REALLY wanting to bring about Handmaid’s tail tale. (G-d, I know it’s a lot to ask, but can they please read another book?) c) because you’re pissing me off, and I’m exhausted, and so are my middle fingers.

This psy-ops is so obvious, so blatant, that I can’t believe some of you fell for it. And yet, there it is, on social media.

Didn’t you learn anything from the last six years?

Buckle up. The mid term elections are going to be a straight up bitch, and we only win them by the grace of G-d, even thought drooling idiots scaring away half the voters.

Why do I need to point out it’s a psy-ops? Again and again, learn the signs. You won’t have me around forever. If the other kids were screaming and pushing and saying we needed to burn the Constitution, would you do the same? Why? Because you forgot your brain in your other jacket?

And if you didn’t fall for it, good on you. Now go fan out through the net and the real world and point out it’s a psy-ops and also that it makes no sense. And also that the person posting the same thing again and again might not be… precisely alive, but just a bunch of electrons somewhere. And also that some of these names have a … foreign quality to them. And also that psy-ops orchestrators are not our friends. They don’t wish us well. And we should not help them.

Get out there and spread the truth. And may the Lord have mercy on us all.

184 thoughts on “The Collective”

  1. Thank you, Sarah. Well said. And to just one of your well-made points …

    “The Handmaid’s Tale” should be recognized as the exposition of Sharia and Islamic life it is (reportedly that was Atwood’s actual source) but has been twisted into a condemnation particularly of Christianity, mostly – in my humble and completely unbiased opinion – by people who not only seem to have read no other book, but who likely haven’t actually even read THT itself and are simply riffing off the tropes and memes.

    Liked by 3 people

    1. When it came out, she said that she was responding to the rise of the “Evangelicals” in the US as a political force. Whatever “Evangelical” meant at the time, which is as easy to nail down as is Jello™ on a polished marble wall. So the darlings who read the SparkNotes for the book assume it is about, oh, Southern Baptists, maybe Methodists [which flavor?], Church of Christ (if they are going through “American South, denominations in), and sometimes the Latter Day Saints. But not Catholics, unless also Catholics.

      Islam? Oh no, never Islam, because Reasons.

      Liked by 4 people

      1. The Latter-Day Saints are evangelical in the sense that they actively proselytize. But I suspect most of the denominations that typically fall under the heading of “evangelical” would be scandalized to be included in the same group as the LDS Church.

        Liked by 1 person

      2. Baptists are portrayed as an armed, large, and organized resistance in the book.

        One of its flaws is that the groups designated as enemies constitute a majority of the American population.

        Liked by 3 people

  2. For reasons, I’ve been spending a lot of time online and watching TV. Have not seen the hysteria on FB (I do have it locked down). Rarely read MSN/Yahoo, etc., news. Do follow Fox News.

    Only reference I’ve seen on Fox News regarding what Clancy represents is to point out that this is one venue some to push post birth abortion. Reactions seen? Most it is to call for limiting abortion even more.

    Pretty sure I’ve stated my opinion. Clancy, or any woman who kills their children of any age, are guilty of murder. Where they reside or do not (not apposed to death penalty), prison or mental health facility for life, is immaterial. Latter might be more torturous. Former might make it easier for her to suicide. Either are consequences Clancy earned.

    Liked by 3 people

    1. The Reader agrees with you wholeheartedly (yeah hug that pillow again). But he notes that the loan juror had made it highly likely that Clancy will walk. There is no chance that Massachusetts can successfully retry her after the sh** show the prosecution put on, the failure of the judge to sequester the jury, and the general noise about the case in the MSM and on social media. And without a new trial, she walks. The Reader still admires the guy for sticking to his beliefs but…

      Maybe Harmeet Dhillon can muster a Federal case for deprivation of civil rights and try it somewhere else.

      Liked by 2 people

    2. I had the … interesting … experience of arguing with some women who’d been saying the “repeal the 19th” BS, started with them assuming I was a supporter of her, which flipped to me being the extremist on punishment when I said murderers should get the death penalty.

      They didn’t like that, too much of a consequence.

      Liked by 6 people

      1. If we should decriminalize murder, why not have vigilante executions?

        vigilantism can literally be defined as a victimless crime, if you import stupid ‘thinking’ from the left selectively enough.

        The law schools have been conspiring to prevent me from having a perfect Qin Shi Huangdi utopia disguised as libertarianism. Either that, or them being wrong does not prevent me from being wrong also about some insane sophomoric idea I cooked up.

        Liked by 1 person

      2. Some murderers should get the death penalty. So should some other criminals. Mostly those found guilty of violent crimes, but how about Bernie Madoff? Ripped off thousands of people, ruined hundreds of innocent lives, drove at least a dozen people to suicide? What about Fauxi the evil lying lawn gnome? “Hangin’s too good for ‘im! Burnin’s too good for ‘im! He should be torn into little bitsy pieces and buried alive!!” [roll ‘Reach Out’ by Cheap Trick] 😁

        Which criminals deserve to be executed? That’s where it gets complicated — which is why they are tried by judges and juries, rather than just a law clerk looking up statutes.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. If it’s murder, then they should be executed.

          The various complications come in with “how do we know they committed murder, rather than manslaughter or a just killing,” and similar work to avoid becoming murderers ourselves.

          I still find it darkly hilarious that folks setting their hair on fire because a jury appeared to be finding “did it, was insane” rather than “Did it, but it’s not that bad, parole in 15 years” or “did it, oops, twenty years max” were horrified at the idea of it being the moral thing to do to kill someone who murdered.

          Liked by 5 people

          1. The whole purpose of execution is to remove a danger to society, IMO, which is why I’m fine with Supermax lifetime sentences. I think of it as the Ted Bundy vs. Ted Kazyncski situation. The former got out and murdered again due to lax security. The latter was safely sequestered away from society until his natural death.

            This of course supposes appropriate sentencing lengths. “Life, no parole” too often gets watered down to “time served.”

            Liked by 1 person

            2. What compelling purpose was served by spending $millions of our tax dollars to keep Charles Manson alive, in comfort, for 50+ years? The victims were dead. After all that time, so were most of their families. The survivors had to attend 11 parole hearings, face that smug evil bastard, relive the worst horrors of their lives, and beg a bunch of left-wing activists not to let that smirking monster out of jail.

              Parole hearings are Just Fucking Evil torture sessions for innocent people. They have to dredge up their worst experiences all over again and if they don’t wail piteously enough the ‘compassionate’ parole board sets their tormentors free to do it again.

              Eliminating parole would cut crime by more than half. That’s how many criminals are arrested while already on parole.

              Liked by 3 people

        2. During homeschooling decades ago, my wife discovered and taught our kids that at the beginning of Rome, the penalty for all serious crimes was death. (It brought to mind the scene in STOS where Spock is reciting the penalties Harry Mudd faced for crimes on one planet….Mudd stops him and says the common thread is death).

          What ever the reason, death does tend to focus one on the pros and cons of a course of action

          Like

        3. Bernie Madoff’s clients thought Bernie was steeling FOR them. They got angry when it turned out he was steeling FROM them. F-ck them. The bankruptcy estate recovered most of the money and the ultimate losses for the clients were negligible. Just sayin.

          Liked by 1 person

        1. Because we are relying on an extrajudicial process to deliver the result we recognize is the right one while pretending that our hands are clean. Pontius Pilate has heirs.

          Liked by 1 person

  3. Thank you for writing this today, Sarah. I desperately needed to read it after just finishing an article from Sasha Stone about obvious insanity (to me at any rate) in a lot of women and I’m telling myself, I am nothing like these women, never have been. I have never had a cultish need for being in a group of women. Maybe it’s my ADHD. Of course she’s guilty as hell of killing those three children.

    Liked by 2 people

  4. I can barely afford my one wife. I don’t see how I could possibly afford a harem. And for those who actually have harems, they probably bless Allah that women don’t have a central hive mind.

    Liked by 3 people

    1. Since today is the 60th anniversary of the broadcast premier of Star Trek, let’s pull in a Trek reference and a half:

      One upside to a harem of Borg women would be only one argument at a time, though Harry Mudd would likely have a loud opinion on a shared-mind android harem.

      Liked by 3 people

        1. Pondering the similarities of an argument with a borg-female harem and arguing with a greek chorus…

          (Simultaneously, with echo effects)“We are the borg.”

          “Yes, dears, I know.”

          “You forgot to take the trash out.”

          “Oh, sorry, I will just use a phaser and disintegrate it.”

          “The phaser leaves a disagreeable smell. You are disregarding our comfort, and our feelings. Again.”

          “Of course I’m not! I care deeply about your collective feelings!”

          “That does not seem to be the case. Perhaps the borg queen was right about you.”

          “Oh, come on, honeys! Maybe you’re just running low on charge – how about if you all go plug in and I pump some extra antimatter in the reactor for all y’all?”

          “Well, we are feeling a bit peckish. Very well. You may proceed.”

          Liked by 1 person

  5. Well said, the lefties want everyone to think there is some kind of bond among woman (and any other group they think they can use). Divide people up into little groups they can direct and control to enhance their power. Then use them to disperse nonsense among their opposition and discourage them.

    Liked by 1 person

  6. Absolutely nothing made me (or my daughter) angrier than feminist-symp commentators and activists blithely assuming that since we were women — of course we would support Hillary Clinton! We were women, and she (the horrible harridan Hillary) was a woman too, and going to be the first woman president of the US – so OF COURSE we were voting for her.

    Um. No. No on a flaming billboard ten stories tall.

    Interesting point about the Clancy trial being an organized psy-op. I had not considered that before this. (Although there have been previously some trials of murderous mothers in the last couple of decades: Andrea Yates and Samantha Smith for example – they didn’t excite the same level of apparent support on social media by unhinged AWFLs.)

    Liked by 5 people

    1. THIS SO MUCH.

      Back in 2016 I got a lot of that flak from various shades of lefties. I finally came up with a pithy reply that “My brains didn’t fall out my ear-hole when I grew t!ts.” (Coarse, but effective.)

      One particular specimen of zealot-D fanboi started in telling me that I wasn’t “a REAL woman” in consequence. (For not voting Shrillary. Really.) So I claimed it and related the anecdote as “They call me an Unwoman.”

      Liked by 2 people

    2. In 2008, $SPOUSE was still a registered Donk, and when primary time came around, she got a call from the Hildebeast campaign. Her responses were a) to laugh at the caller, b) change party affiliation to Republican, and c) to vote for Sarah Palin and that other guy.

      I don’t do anti-social media (have a dormant account on Gab, but a misfeature led me to stop lurking there), so didn’t twig to the psy-op nature of this Pferdescheiss.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. One large contributor to DJTs eventual takeover of the GOP so he could annihilate the Dowager Empress was the inside-the-beltway reality distortion field wherein the GOP elite agreed with the Maverick campaign’s view that Sarah Palin was one of the main reasons Mav lost, while in fact the opposite, that hands-across-the-aisle campain-pausing Maverick was the reason Maverick lost, and that he would have lost harder was it not for the grassroots support for Sarah.

        Which is why next round the GOP elite put up Mittens, who managed to lose even when Barry was pretty much convinced going in that he’d be a one term wonder.

        DJT was just the first GOP candidate in a while to listen to what actual voters were saying.

        Liked by 5 people

  7. Thought on the “Collective Mind” idea. one author got into the idea that a Collective Mind was Good, but IMO the major flaw in the author’s view of it was that the author believed that the Collective Mind would think as the author did. [Sarcastic Grin]

    Liked by 4 people

    1. American individualism is what the collective generalized will of mankind wants, doncha know.

      Anti-western academics are not just settler-colonists, they are also cancer cells of the corporate humanity.

      :D

      and if I was not trolling, or jonesing for trouble or jokes, I would be serious still.

      Like

    3. I once quoted the line about it being a good thing we didn’t all like the same thing, think what a haggis shortage there would be — and a woman literally wrote, “You could have mine.”

      Like

  8. fellow dudebros

    Item, between the undocumented criminal aliens, and the documented but perhaps inappropriately admitted MENA terrorist simps, we may have tribal immigration, that could bring cultural influence. But not enough that said cultural influence must win.

    There are three wrong ways to invent ‘repeal the 19th’, but one of them is de facto repeal for immigrant women of the Bidenistas and Obamistas. Also the Harristas, who are stupider than the Obamistas, and more imitative of the Obamistas than even the Bidenistas. Sharia law for women, and of course the more chattel stuff of undocumented de facto slavery and in particular sex slavery.

    Item, El Sayed is running this cycle. Which is maybe strong horse thinking, probably incorrect strong horse thinking, by Democrats.

    Item, I think El Sayed, Talarico, Platner, etc., may be purely foreign funded astroturf, and very weak horses.

    We are now less than two months out.

    For campaigns that are basically fraud (of donations, not necessarily votes), they can give up the pretense before the elections, just after the election, or way after.

    Harris and Biden were more of a way after thing, too much face involved.

    There have basically been signs of rebranding among Democrats, which may be giving up on the grift of the rabidly anti-Trump stuff, or it may be that they want some heresy from leftism to explain a certain loss.

    Iran, Russia, PRC, all have bets riding against Trump. Okay, also their proxy warfare nations like Snowy-Mexico and the Youkay. If they had no goods or services to spend this midterm, something, something.

    I dunno.

    We shall see.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. I’ve seen it suggested – and I think the idea has merit – that Talarico and Platner are what the left thinks men like. The left has a problem being seen as “anti-male” (for good reason), and men lean right according to the polls. So the left is trying to demonstrate that it’s not anti-male by pushing candidates that the left believes will appeal to males who lean right but might be persuadable. The left constantly calls the right Nazis… and so they nominated a male Nazi fan in Maine. The right are Jesus freaks, and so is much of the population of Texas, so the left is pushing Talarico in Texas.

      And before you knock the idea that the progs buy it, I listened to a prog woman talk for a bit on Saturday. It was at a luncheon, so it was a nominally “neutral” setting. I was sitting with some of my family members at a table with three other women. One of them was the prog in question. She was talking about how excited she was that she might finally be getting a job… before starting to talk about the details. It turns out the job was with a Catholic womens organization (afaik, she’s LDS, not Catholic) of some sort (I think it was a group of nuns, though I’m not 100% certain about that) that was extremely progressive, and had relocated to LA County at some point in the past from the East Coast. She was disappointed because she wouldn’t be able to march with them on Labor Day this year. Then she talked about how MAGA was doomed because there was a new program called “MAGA-less” that was (according to her) helping people leave MAGA and that she seemed to believe was wildly successful. She was also talking about how Arizona and Texas were turning blue, and how Talarico was just amazing, and he even quoted the Bible, which just went to show how he was a good Christian man.

      I listened for several minutes, and then politely excused myself and left (she wasn’t the only reason I was leaving) before I started an argument.

      Anyway, my point is that yes, they really do think Talarico has a wide appeal in conservative Christian circles.

      Like

        1. Beyond a certain shallow, half-sane fringe, yes: it’s LSD++ all the way down.

          von Clausewitz: “No battle plan survives contact with the enemy.”

          Huns/Hoydens: “No truly leftist worldview survives collision with reality.”

          (Of course they have something better than reality, they have faith. Of a sort…

          What do you call folie a deux, upscaled to thousands and millions? Sigh.)

          Like

          1. When a Leftist Hive Mind collides with Reality, Reality bounces off and the Hive Mind sheds a few members that hadn’t burrowed in deeply enough. Some of them drift back and get stuck again on the Hive Mind. Some find a More Grounded Bedrock.

            And a few float out into the Deep Fringe of Wyrde Beliefs, forever to remain unglued.

            Like

      2. I occasionally look in on the progressive mormon blogs but it’s bad for both my blood pressure and morale. And also I can’t slap people through the internet.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. Yeah. The logic that some of them evidence is pretty far out there. I suppose it comes from deciding the desired result first, and pretzel-twisting logic to try and use doctrine to. That seems to be what Talarico himself does, leading to things like his declaration that the Christian Deity (aka Our Father in Heaven) is non-binary.

          Like

  9. I am not a Borg drone and resistance is NOT futile. The wheels of justice grind fine, but they do grind, and that is something to remember. It may be cold comfort but at least it is there.

    On the homefront, the state of Virginia has three questions on the ballot this November, the first of which essentially translates to asking for abortion to be enshrined in the state constitution. They passed these questions through the General Assembly well before the White Witch took office, so it is not a recent or surprise item on the agenda to those who are paying attention. A long-standing plan like this will be difficult to defeat.

    If you are the praying kind, please pray for the residents and state of Virginia. We need another miracle to beat the machine and prevent the state from becoming the East Coast equivalent of California. Given we already received a miracle with the gerrymandered map earlier this year, I’m not sure how many we have left. Every prayer helps, so thank you in advance.

    Liked by 4 people

    1. Those of us in the Commonwealth have had two miracles so far this year. Redistricting AND gun control. I’m not hopeful for the outcome of the elections here though.

      Liked by 3 people

    1. ‘Cats in the head’ is an even more beguiling metaphor than ‘rats in the head’ (which does so much to explain Marxists and their assorted Marx-isms, within a very small space).

      To step on another good but quite massively over-told story, it’s not “inside you are two wolves…”

      “Inside you are two cats, who are, complete within themselves, an ecology-wrecking dynasty of ever-expanding predatorial destruction.

      “Are you going to feed your two cats, and help them realize their destiny to devastate a whole ecology of rats-in-the-head? Or remain impervious to their plaintive yet demanding cries to be adopted into your inner family and be a part of your own fateful purpose?”

      Liked by 1 person

  11. What finally struck me was the displays are just another form of tribalism, like we saw after Irnya’s murder.

    A lot of blacks were horrified by it. And the ones that tried to excuse it got all the TikTok time. It’s the same pattern here.

    Liked by 5 people

  12. I’ll probably be shunned for this; but after 40+ years of “wedded bliss” (15.25 + 27.42) plus assorted other contacts via family, school, work, church, and so on, I don’t think women have a single mind inside any of them. Moods, hormones, politics, etc. assist the equivalent of multiple personalities. Sometimes multiple times per hour.

    Mind you, he wrote on purpose, the men I’ve known over my 68 years behaved similarly; but without the excuse of hormones, moods, and so on, we’re expected to pick ourselves up, dust ourselves off, and give the coach ten more laps around the practice field. Bleeding? “Rub some dirt on it.” Cover it up. “Ya wanna live forever?”

    And so we do. Because “there ain’t no cavalry coming…” We are the cavalry.

    Liked by 4 people

      3. Yes; and this might just be the essential, de-fi-ning rite-of-passage to true-adulthood for all of Generation Pooper Scooper / Generation Cleanup on Aisle Boomer. We are the ones we’ve been waiting for, no-one else is coming.

        (That’s why “Generation Jones” is both wishful thinking and reality-inverting mad delusion. No, we do not want to be you. We’d fall down on our knees and thank our lucky stars we’re not like you, O smuggish lefty-boom-booms. We’re Generation Heracles, like it or not (most often, not); and we have to try to flush out your maxi-crappy Augean Stables. Because if we don’t do it, nobody else will. And we’re plumb tired of the stink and the flies. But even more tired of you-all liking things just that way.)

        Like

      1. It’s worse, he thinks an individual woman is a collective all by herself of the voices in her head.

        I can only assume that being able to quickly switch between true face and society mask or having a mercurial temperament has somehow registered as “has multiple personality disorder”.

        Like

      2. Same.

        When I worked for the USFS, late ’70s, the male members of the crew were shocked, shocked!, that I did not automatically take a women’s POV. Why? I had my own opinion. Been that way since I can remember. Source of a lot of conflict between mom and I.

        Liked by 1 person

      3. Well, you do write better than me. I was trying to suggest there are no external collectives, just the ones we manage in our own heads.

        I’m happy to report we only listen to David Allen Coe on Tuesdays.

        Like

    4. Men have hormones. The specific action of male hormones differs from female. One big difference is that men get taught that hormones aren’t an acceptable verbal excuse for bad behavior. The other is that male hormones run on a different clock cycle from female hormones.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. “men get taught that hormones aren’t an acceptable verbal excuse for bad behavior“

        –

        Blink.

        Trust me women, maybe not all women, maybe not some generations that have come behind me, do not get to use hormones as an acceptable verbal excuse for bad behavior. I wasn’t. Not ever.

        Granted it is easier now that menopause has kicked in. But never ever during the “hormone” years was I given any latitude because “it was that time of the month”.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. I’ve been informed that it “must be that time of the month,” generally by guys who couldn’t manage to build a coherent argument and thus decided the fault was elsewhere.

          Various extended family members randomly decided that things I do quarterly or yearly are signs that I’m pregnant again.

          Turns out that “it’s finally warm enough to air out the house a little and move stuff to scrub the floors” doesn’t depend on my hormone cycle.

          Liked by 3 people

          1. The problem is women can experience, I’m going to say, almost any pain a man might encounter and just as severe (I can think of two male’s pain would be worse).

            But there are at least two pains men can never know; child labor and monthly pain. The latter women have no recourse for (at least I never did). Do not know of anyone else but taking sick leave three days a month (minimum) was never an option.

            Like

            1. Mom gave birth three times without meds, walked three miles after cracking her collar bone and crawling out of the crash, and had a serious tooth infection.
              (She and I both got lucky on the monthly part, although after all my surgeries I’ve started being able to tell it’s happening.)

              She said the tooth pain was the worst, so we could use that as a baseline for comparison?

              Like

                1. I was able to get ahead of the tooth infection so it didn’t get to the “this is serious” point, but– I’d put it as less bad than labor #2, but it was constant. (And with #2 I was standing there arguing with a nurse about if she should contact my doctor, being fully aware both the kid and I were at risk of death if this didn’t get taken care of fast.)

                  Like

              2. Mine wasn’t a comparison on which pain is worse. Just that there are two that men can never experience the pain from, childbirth or monthly cycles. That there are no equivalent for men. Latter of which varies from woman to woman. From, barely to OMG. I was somewhere between the two, more toward the OMG range, but never incapacitated (even working in the woods or backpacking).

                Liked by 1 person

              3. My wife gave birth three out of four times without an epidural. First two times we were in a place where epidural wasn’t available. (Longish story, not telling it in public, email me if you want details). Third time she had an epidural. Fourth time she was going to have an epidural, but baby came so fast that by the time they were ready to hook it up they said “no point now, this kid is going to be out in ten minutes” — and they were correct.

                Like

                1. My brother beat the doctor to the hospital room. (My sister and I weren’t much slower, but that’s brag worthy so we go with it.)

                  ….which was actually a blessing, because it meant they only had the one nurse there, so my dad (the rancher) was standing right there, and flipped the umbilical cord off of my brother’s neck in an move that was absolutely NOT medically acceptable, but — he was in rancher mode, and calf mode.

                  Like

        2. Same. Whatever your hormones are doing is your responsibility to control and don’t ever take it out on other people. And apologize if your control fails.

          Which might mean crying privately in the bathroom stall for catharsis, but control takes practice.

          Doesn’t stop people from accusing you of being hormonal and irrational if your find something outrageous and say so.

          Liked by 1 person

          1. Part of my training was early/late teens. Between mom going through early menopause and me. It was “interesting”. Since then? We’ve both apologized. Working on all male crews as a college student was a walk in the park in comparison.

            Like

    5. I won’t shun you, but I’ll call you seriously lacking in observational skills.

      To keep it short, it’s like the combat team that complains about all the resources wasted on the supply chain.

      My husband very nearly maimed the guy who tried the “women just need to pick themselves up and stop whining” when someone tried the BS after I admitted I wasn’t physically able to do something due to having been gutted repeatedly and the most recent one having not healed up yet.

      He knows I walked around on a broken foot for several days before he could bully me into going to the doctor, because we shut up and just deal with it. The second you don’t, SumDood has to show up to inform us how women are just whiny, and you don’t get help anyways.

      Liked by 1 person

  13. First: I don’t think women or a monolith or all support Clancy or whatever. I suspect at the outside these people represent all the fools who rolled a natural 1 on their save against latest stupidity (ie. 5% max of the total population max).

    That said, I don’t think the interest and frenzy is a psyop. I think it is something much more frightening.

    I think it is the result of decades of psyops having worked to the point there is a subset of the population who essentially create self-organizing psyops. It might be the most successful communist act of capitalism since Che tee-shirts.

    Once that happens the news attention is normal because journalist are conditioned to react the appearance of a psyop. They might think it is one started by one of the “buy a mob” houses.

    Nope, I don’t think all the protesters are the courthouse or local, but last month over 4,000 people drove to PA to get hit with sticks. I can imagine a few hundred driving t0 MA to be fools on TV. At this point we’re used to various conservatives looking around and finding the buses and preplaced piles of brick, which we haven’t seen yet.

    Another thing missing is multiple cities. If this was one of the old, bought psyops I’d have expected TV coverage of protests in major blue cities with the usual suspects and signs. We have not seen that.

    The problem if my theory is correct is it means we’ve got a much bigger job than cutting off the money and cleaning up the media. It means we have a brainwashed population which is probably, on the whole, beyond saving who will impede recover while actively trying to continue the chain of damage while thinking they are making things better.

    Charlatans who are paid can be, if nothing else, bought off by paying them more. True believes can’t.

    So I hope you’re right and that this is just a psyop.

    Like

      1. Perhaps, but contrast it with the Data Centers “outrage” or the Floyd “outrage” or the Tesla “outrage”. Those were large scale and nationwide. We know data centers has Chinese fingerprints and Floyd had NGO fingerprints (I haven’t seen anything on Telsa but given the quickness and widespread nature I suspect NGOs fighting for their lives there).

        I’m not going to say in some people who normally run psyops aren’t piggy backing where it is easy, such as TikTok, Twitter, BlueSky, etc, but the scale makes me wonder if they started it or are just using it opportunistically.

        Believe me, I want this to be a pure psyop but I can’t shake the feeling six decades (minimum) of psyops have created essentially humanbots who, having no purpose when no psyop is being run, try to gin them up on their own and the existing infrastructure can’t tell them for the “real” ones.

        Like

        1. IIRC Tesla attack funding has been traced to the same NGOs as the Summer of Love protests. They really hated they lost control of twitting.

          Liked by 1 person

        2. Data center “this looks like a psyop” started about a month after the spin-up got to soaking up attention on TwiX, with people going “this doesn’t look organic”– so Sarah’s post here would be a week or two early if the timeline held.

          Which it probably won’t, since the “mostly peaceful” took much longer for folks to realize that there were always bricks, and always frozen water thrown, and then they started looking for weirdly painted cars that showed up in multiple states.

          Liked by 1 person

          1. Maybe. Listening to the jurors who have given interviews I’m still think advantage to “self-organized self-psyop that the existing infrastructure has latched onto”.

            Note, I’m avoiding organic. It’s not organic as in showing concerns of a broad population. It’s more like IC chips on first boot that have a random state being used instead of being initialized properly first. The psyop vulnerable are now continuously powered on and if no programming is loaded they run with the random values they woke up with.

            Like

      2. China just “recapitalized” its banking system to the tune of US $56 billion. Since the Chinese banking system has $74 trillion in, purported, assets and the best forecasts are that a minimum of $7-12 trillion is impaired, the $56 billion is a nit. That said, look for the Chinese to accelerate their influence attempts. they’re in real trouble.

        there was a rumour that the CCP was going to seize all the private savings to pay down the local government debt since Xi has declared that there will be no local debt anymore. Like WuFlu, they do have a tendency to do really stupid stuff when Xi shoots his mouth off. Then again, that EU harridan is talking about the same thing. Look for US dems to start about all the boomer money rotting in 401k’s here at home since they and the rest of the leftist idiots are as stupid as they are evil.

        Like

        1. Yep. Japan is also having currency issues. I suspect we’re finally reaching the point where the bill for stimulus to keep line going is coming due. In the West, especially the US, Boomers thought they could push it past their expiration but they won’t.

          Still unsure if COVID hastened (conventional wisdom) or delayed the reconning.

          That said, China’s problems are, if navigated well, probably to our long term benefit. They heighten risk of war (distract the population and liquidate a lot of young men who are the big risk) in the near term (especially if the Dems win in 2028) but hasten the moment China reverts to their more recent mean.

          And it isn’t Boomer 401ks they’ll gut for the most part. It’ll just be anyone born post 1960 or so at the same time they gut Social Security with a means test (a means test based on the 401k before they seize that).

          Like

          1. There already is a “means test” on SS when you are receiving it. Mom gets more per month than either of us. She pays no taxes on her SS. Hubby and I, with SS, combined with the his pension (because my $121/month bumps it so much), and minimum required IRA distributions, but our SS into the 85% SS taxable; plus everything else incoming. This is feds. State taxes 0% of SS.

            Only good news, for now, is when my SS is minimal withdrawal, in three years (year I turn 73), we are already at the max SS taxable. OTOH we probably will kick up into a higher tax bracket.

            Like

        2. A couple of days ago, I saw mention on X that the CCP is talking about a bill that would allow them to seize private savings in the event of a war. Is that what you were referring to?

          The person posting about it mentioned a rumor that the CCP planned to declare martial law in the lead-up to Xi’s next “election” (by CCP leadership, not the population), and seize the savings then.

          I don’t know enough about China’s inner workings to say whether it’s likely true or not. I haven’t seen mention of it at the two China channels I sometimes watch (China Show, and China Uncensored). But it is pretty clear that a lot of people in China are spooked right now and trying to get out, and the CCP is desperate to keep anyone and everyone in country without looking like they’re trying to keep everyone in country.

          Like

          1. Seizing savings does make a certain amount of sense as a war preparation — from a commie perspective, anyways. Preparation for war might also explain the last two years of the PBOC stocking up on gold.

            Like

    2. Total Pennsic population was about 9000 this year, but admittedly not all of them got hit with sticks.

      (We were not there. Last year was something of a blackpill).

      Like

      1. I wonder if Pennsic population drop off is like Burning Man, the SCA has stayed a Boomer controlled thing too long to survive them.

        I never made it. For a long time I was disappointed I hadn’t now I wonder why I invested so much energy in the SCA seeing what it has become (moving to Atlanta was a blackpill then LGBT activism was a blackpill then COVID). The middle one is making even boffer harder some weeks.

        But my understanding was Pennsic was rarely more than 50% fighters.

        Liked by 2 people

        1. Youngest brother was into SCA. Always seemed from the outside like a lot of politics and clique-excluding.

          The thing that seemed attractive to me was the HEMA stuff, albeit not enough to gain any fraction of my time during my working years, and now my knees would probably express an opinion.

          Liked by 1 person

          1. FM, you wrote, “Always seemed from the outside like a lot of politics and clique-excluding.”

            Boy howdy, ain’t that the trooth. My husband and I attended a couple local SCA events when we BRIEFLY considered joining. And I had strong flashbacks to high school.

            The same snotty arrogance. Based on knowing unwritten rules. That no one would tell you even if you asked. Meetings and competitions that weren’t announced, because everyone who MATTERED had been in the planning committee. Sneering condescension and resentment when you DID ask what was going on.

            We shook the dust off our feet and have never been back. Gee, wonder why membership is declining [she asked disingenuously]?

            Liked by 3 people

            1. “Gee, wonder why membership is declining [she asked disingenuously]?”

              The In-Crowd are getting a little old, and they can’t fit into their armor these days.

              Kind of like WorldCon but without the mobility scooters and oxygen bottles.

              Liked by 2 people

            3. I briefly hung around those people in the early 1980s, but never took on any pseudo-persona, just enjoying the blade practice with knowledgeable people. But after a while, I said “my reality isn’t that great, but it’s better than this”, and walked away.

              Liked by 1 person

              1. “just enjoying the blade practice with knowledgeable people.”

                An afternoon of quarterstaff lessons with a local dojo convinced me that I was not cut out for SCA. The one SCA dude there was doing things that counted as “points” that even he conceded were fabulously unrealistic. Rolling the tip of his naginata against his opponent’s foot, for example, was a point.

                I was trying to learn how to strike my opponent in a harm-filled manner. He was doing some no-contact variation of Olympic foil practice.

                My approach to stick fighting was always “if you have to hit them twice, you’re doing it wrong.” SCA was always going to be weird dance practice.

                Even now, old and crunchy, the thought of that kid with his bamboo naginata does make me smirk. Says me, “That’s not going to do anything.” “No, but it’s still a point,” says he.

                Like

                1. We’ve been members since the 1980s. We haven’t been active for nearly a decade, but we hae fond memories of our years with the group beloved took from about-to-be-disbanded to “could be a Principality if it wanted to,” membership of aroud 250.

                  But who’s leading makes a big difference. He did his best to make everyone feel welcome, active, and so on. He also had to deal with midieval levels of intrigue from the “knightly household vs local group,” faction.

                  And we were in the Northeast at the time. So many of his friends from that time have called him all sorts of ugly names because he doesn’t hate Trump. And the household we belong to where we spent many Pennsics has become a pallid shadow of itself betweent he “you dissed my prounouns!” struggle session during Covid and the fact the current leader is not very good at the job and holds my beloved in contempt for supporting Trump. (We remain on good terms with the former leader(s)).

                  Just sad. Pennsic in its prime could be magical.

                  Liked by 2 people

  14. Having watched some of the 19th A rants over on X, very few struck me as serious, but as an encouragement to use the longhouse effect to rein in the crazies, instead of letting the crazies use it against them.

    (shrug) For what I saw, they were being made by women as much as by men.

    Like

    1. YT (female) commentator ShoeOnHead as transcribed over on BattleSwarm, reinforcing the “look, ‘Repeal The 19th’ is a real reaction, but as a joke, dude” assessment:

      ”No. All these women did was make a murderer a millionaire and get America closer to repealing the 19th.

      No, seriously. Because of this, repeal the 19th was trending on Twitter for like multiple days.

      Honestly, at this point, if I have to give up my vote so Pitbullmama78 also loses her vote, that is a sacrifice I am willing to make.”

      Like

        1. She was always left. Her nickname is still “Commie Mommy”

          She might have moved slightly to the right over her years on YouTube, and after having a kid, to the point that she says resonable things sometimes.

          But her starting point was as a Bernie Bro.

          Like

          1. Yeah. I very occasionally watch her. One show that I saw a few years ago had her showing off pictures of rooms that some of her male fans sent her. She cheered rooms with communist memorabilia, and mocked rooms with any sort of Nazi or fascist memorabilia.

            The general theory is that she trended a bit right while dating a conservative guy, but quickly dropped back presumably when they broke up. And that was years ago.

            She’s good because she’s not afraid to go against the crowd at times and openly mock her fellow lefties. But she’s very much a lefty herself. I suppose she might be a bit like Maher in that respect.

            Like

        2. Shoe knows how to keep an audience. This is what “keeping an audience” looks like. They read the room, take a provocative stance, and cross their fingers.

          It’s Normie stuff. I don’t get it at all.

          Like

        3. Gone back.

          She was Left in the first place, and while I avoid her because her style stinks on ice, nothing I’ve seen suggested her principles shifted at all.

          Which also matches up with a lot of the collective guilt for women folks– they were on theleft, they came to “the right” because they got tired of being hit, but they have no intention of not hitting others ont he same logic that put them on the left in the first place.

          Like

      1. “ALSO all the ones on facebook were deadly serious.”

        Just keep a list of them. One day it’ll be pretty fun to be able to say “I remember when you supported jail for vaccine deniers.” And then the screenshot… >:D

        Liked by 2 people

  15. I am an opinionated idiot, most of my opinions are the proper ones for the progression of humanity. That should be the key, the progression of humanity. Moving forward, in a fashion that promotes everyone. You can’t do that without the individual, because it is always some lone nerd or odd, as the authoress likes to point out, that makes the discovery that moves mankind forward. The species must survive, and on two world that makes better odds than just one world. If Muslims want to have their own rules, fine they can have their own worlds. The rest of us can have ours, but see that won’t make them happy. Why? Simply put until everyone agrees with them, they might be wrong. In truth they know their system is wrong, but they can’t give up the power they perceive they have. So they have to destroy everything else to prove they are right, even if it destroys civilization, you see it’s their destiny. Muslims are in essence Gabrielle’s horn.

    Like

      1. I think that will be self limiting to a degree – the Absolutely Mandatory Big List Of Rules that work for surviving in a desert are not going to work for living in a can surrounded by vacuum.

        Liked by 1 person

        2. You’re forgetting that when necessary for damaging infidels, those “rules” are mre like “guidelines”. See also: taqqiya and hudna.

          Liked by 2 people

      2. Also, let’s flash back to the bad-old-days of the Barbary Pirates. And, more specifically, to the “interesting” first conversations I’ve read about between the American negotiators and same.

        More or less, “Islam tells us to rob and pillage the infidel, which is you. Why would we ever go against out God, or even give up the slaves and the gold and the other loot either??”

        Yes, that’s very highly paraphrased, but I invite those not in-the-know there to revisit original sources. And if anyone thinks the early 1800s are no longer relevant to an Islamic Space Age, please note the fundamentalist side of this religion basically stopped its clocks about half a millennium before that…

        (The story about “Faithful” Asteroid Belt pirates would be called something like “Insh’allah.” No, I’m not going to write it, I’ve been getting too much about those 5 recent pictures and the last vignette topic, and doing rather too much research on Milky Way geography. But it’s eerily credible.)

        Liked by 2 people

  16. I don’t doubt a bit that the Clancy trial hysteria (heh) is pushed as a psyop.

    The same women I know who bought the last several ops are hot and heavy into this one. Smugly masked in public faces taunting all who are mean and hate women, and, of course, science.

    But I agree with Fulton Sheen, after 15-20 years of legal abortion, women will be driven mad.

    Even Shakespeare knew that murder affects women differently then men.

    Child sacrifice all the moreso.

    Liked by 4 people

      1. There are men who have killed their kids. But as someone noted elsewhere a couple of days ago, typically the man in question then kills his wife, and then kills himself. This results in significantly fewer showy trials involving the horrible man who killed his kids.

        There have been women who killed themselves along with their kids. But it’s more difficult for them to kill their husbands than it is for their husbands to kill them.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. :points up:

          This.

          Lots of murder/suicides by adult males, though by percent it will of course be lower because more able to do physical violence category does, in fact, do more physical violence. And wife dies unless he doesn’t have access to wife.

          There was actually a case about two years ago in Wenatchee that aligned fairly closely to the Clancy case, but divorced couple, three little girls, and the murderer succeeded in suicide. Body wasn’t found for nearly a year, and there were a lot of theories about how he was missing looking for the ‘real killer’, which folks didn’t abandon when his remains were found.

          Like

          1. Video went viral today of ex-husbang going into restaurant, coming up to point-blank range and trying to shoot his wife…except the safety was on. Oops.

            Also, the waiter who pulled him away and helped wrestle him down deserves a raise.

            Liked by 2 people

            1. I haven’t heard many comments about that.

              The ones I have heard are “He should have checked his gun first”

              Like

        1. Part of which may be about physical strength. The gun is the great equalizer in the realm of violence, but if you don’t have a gun, then who are you physically able to kill? Those who are physically weaker than you. Now, I have no desire to delve into the statistics of murders (I’m jumping straight to calling them murders rather than homicides because it’s very, very rare that killing a child or an elderly person was a case of justified self-defense), so I don’t know how many of the women who commit murders had access to a gun. But there are enough people who don’t have guns that it would definitely skew the statistics. Those same women who murdered people weaker than them might have also wanted to murder someone stronger than them, say a healthy man in his 20’s or 30’s, but would have been physically incapable of doing so.

          Like

  17. “Has any of you — any single one of you — asked why the Clancy murder got big on national news right now?”

    I assumed it was Teh Algorithm feeding me red meat and trying to spike my endorphins, as usual.

    “Don’t you think the talk about removing women’s right to vote, or basically every civil liberty and sticking us back in harems or worse is… a little premature?”

    I think the “Rightosphere” contains the same sort of fruitbat eyeball hunters that the Leftosphere has. These guys have to fill up an hour of YouTube time every fricking day, and they have to get and hold an audience. Lying liars telling ever larger and more outrageous lies, tryin’ to get some clout on the Tube.

    I’m trying to write a story about my characters attending university right now. Current events is handing out stuff so dumb I can’t write it in a fictional story. It’s so unreasonable that it breaks my suspension of disbelief. And I’m the author.

    So lets take a look at what’s up here. Recently Sabine Hossenfelder had a youtube entitled “I was offered money to tell you AI will kill us all.” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lPdmYMHrWKg

    She says she was also offered money to say that AI was the greatest thing since sliced bread.

    Sabine, being a highly autistic German scientist and cranky into the bargain, decided to rip the sheets off the scam instead of taking the little bit of money they were offering for her personal integrity.

    A choice being made by few, if you take a look at the ocean of BS being peddled as news/commentary/expert opinion about AI. Most everybody else seems to have taken the money.

    Is AI the only subject people are getting paid to have an opinion about? I mean, –could– it be the only subject? No. No way.

    There are people living in tents in your city’s parks, my friends. Do we really give a rip about some legal case being mishandled by incompetents? They’re doing a lot worse than that.

    Funny how you don’t hear about it on the news though, eh? Almost as if somebody was paying them to shut up about it until after the election…

    If I might offer an unsolicited opinion, I feel that there may be another US-AID doling out billions to the media psy-ops community. Just a thought I had.

    Liked by 1 person

      2. I think he still spouts the billionaire hatred to his mindless followers who are blind to his riches. Then he goes home to one of his mansions just like any true commie leader does.

        Like

      1. That’s true, there are a few like Sabine Hossenfelder making a fuss about not taking the money. Which is nice, I do appreciate the heads-up.

        But it is interesting how -few- of these YouTube talking heads said anything about it. Taking the money appears to be a healthy part of their business model. YouTube doesn’t pay much for a million views anymore, they’re all staring poverty in the eye.

        Like

          1. “…excommunicated from Teh Science.”

            She committed the unforgivable sin of saying that a larger collider wouldn’t show us any new science. Thereby threatening the high energy particle physics Iron Ricebowl.

            She also has the famous Bullsh1t Meter, and gave out an 11/10 the other day.

            They really hate that. ~:D

            Liked by 2 people

      1. [opinion activated]

        That’s another tempest in a teapot that’s being played for all the media clickbait it can get.

        Men -are- playing in the WNBA, I expect that Super Girlie #SophieCunningham and a few more top women players are getting heartily sick of being outclassed and getting injured by cheaters who would rank at second-bench in a university league if they played with the boys. That’s got to be harsh.

        But the drama is getting the league clicks! Personally, I for sure would not be able to tell you who #SophieCunningham is, or pick her out of a lineup, without the 24/7 media blitz.

        It’s the Beverly Hills Housewives of TV sports. And it’s one more “Look! Shiny thing!” to keep the Normies occupied.

        Like

    4. “Is AI the only subject people are getting paid to have an opinion about? I mean, –could– it be the only subject? No. No way.”

      A few right-wing accounts got caught taking money from Big Soda, of all things, around the time Trump banned junk food from SNAP. At this point, I have no clue what topics are safe from paid influence. Not soda, apparently.

      “There are people living in tents in your city’s parks, my friends. Do we really give a rip about some legal case being mishandled by incompetents? They’re doing a lot worse than that.”

      Our priorities are never sorted that neatly. Humans just aren’t wired that way. I suspect this is adaptive.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Do we really give a rip about some legal case being mishandled by incompetents? They’re doing a lot worse than that.

        The legal case is an individual sample among dozens of others over at least the last 35 years showing the systemic failure of the rule of law. You could cause every one of the “homeless” to fall over, and it wouldn’t match the known body count caused by that.

        Like

    1. Because Monarch butterflies are *awesome*! ^_^

      My Mom got into trying to help them out (planting milkweed, and putting the chrysalises into special net containers until they were ready to emerge), but it was shortly before her dementia began to develop, so she didn’t keep at it for very long.

      Like

    2. Same reason the butterflies are brightly and distinctively colored — they’re poison. Eating milkweed fills them with toxins that make predators sick or worse.

      Like

  19. I haven’t seen any mention of this anywhere else, so –

    Hats off to Dutch GT racer Leuc Hartog for reasons detailed in this special episode of The China Show, which aired yesterday – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5j7VmyChRgQ

    On the 5th, there was a GT race in Shanghai. China’s been spending a lot of money trying to attract international sporting events to China, and this includes professional racing. The race in Shanghai was a part of this. During the race, driver David Chen caused an accident that saw two other cars caught up in it. One of the cars struck was driven by British driver Ollie Millroy, which burst into flames before spinning off the track.

    As driver Leuc Hartog approached the site of the accident, he noticed that track officials were not waving any flags. He also noticed that no emergency personnel seemed to be moving toward Millroy’s car, which was still burning. He pulled onto the side of the track, jumped out of his car, and ran up to Millroy’s car. He spotted Millroy inside, and realized that Millroy was unconscious. He tore open the passenger side door, but was unable to reach Millroy. Unfortunately, the fire kept him from opening the driver side door. He noted that the emergency services people still hadn’t started moving toward the burning vehicle, and yelled at them to hurry over with a fire extinguisher. At this point a man finally came over with an extinguisher, handed it to Hartog, and then ran back the way he’d come. Hartog used the extinguisher to reduce the fire to the point where he could get to the driver side door, tore it open, and was able to drag Millroy’s unconscious body out of the burning wreck.

    As Hartog was dragging Millroy clear, a second member of emergency services came over with another extinguisher, but he was unable to figure out how to get it to work. Eventually another man came with a third extinguisher, which he used on the fire.

    Meanwhile, Hartog dragged Millroy to the side of the track. They waited there for at least 15 minutes until the ambulance finally arrived. The ambulance driver had locked himself in the front of the ambulance to take a nap, and no one had been able to wake him up.

    Millroy had numerous broken ribs, and was taken to a hospital. He credits Hartog with saving his life.

    The Chinese news reports on the matter mention safety reviews after the incident, but otherwise report nothing that suggests that there was anything wrong with the response to the crash.

    The respective teams of both Millroy and Hartog have announced that they will no longer compete in any GT championship races that are held in China.

    The video shows an advertisement posted a few days before the race that suggests that the emergency services personnel were random people recruited through the ad, and paid a minimal amount of money.

    Liked by 4 people

    2. How many professional racers will attend the next race that China tries to organize, I wonder? How many of them will quietly “lose” the invitation? And will any of them speak publicly about the reason why they’re declining to attend?

      Liked by 3 people

    3. Yep. The Middle Kingdom.

      And gee, a courageous European dude, literally running towards a fire to help another person live. How not unusual.

      Like

      1. “…running towards a fire to help another person live. How not unusual.”

        And how disappointing to discover that this is a culture-based thing that other cultures don’t share.

        Best part, #LeucHartog doesn’t think he did anything that great. We never do. It’s expected. See somebody in trouble, go help them. Toxic masculinity 101. Even little kids know this one.

        Tell you what, it really f-s me up when I see a crowd of lookieloos standing around an injured person and they’re all doing nothing. Makes me question Humanity and my place in it. Should I help the injured or go after the oblivious a-holes with a stick and BEAT some decency into them?

        Liked by 3 people

          1. The fact that no one’s been arrested for streaming as opposed to stepping up MIGHT have something to do with it.

            Like

            2. There’s no “you have a duty to rescue a stranger, even at the risk of your own life” law on the books in any state in the US (to the best of my knowledge). And there shouldn’t be one.

              In many cases it’s the right thing to do morally, but there’s a difference between what’s moral and what’s legal. If someone wrote a law into the books making it a legal obligation to put yourself in harm’s way to rescue a stranger, it would create a huge number of perverse incentives and moral hazards. For example, if you want to kidnap someone and/or get them in serious trouble? Lurk in an alley and yell “Help, help, I’m being attacked!” while an accomplice “threatens” you with an unloaded gun. Your target now faces the choice between going down a deserted alley (where someone is lurking intending to harm them) or getting into serious trouble with the law.

              There are many times when the right thing to do is not something that you can actually write into the law. This is one of those times. No one has been arrested for streaming instead of stepping up, because their behavior, while immoral, isn’t (and shouldn’t be) illegal.

              Like

              1. He means that people have been arrested for stepping up. The Marine who tackled a violent wacko threatening people on a New York subway, for example. Protecting others from criminal assault, even defe nding yourself, is now a crime in some left-wing jurisdictions.

                Like

                1. Ah, now his wording makes more sense. I remember that guy. My memory wants to call up the name “Daniel Perry” but a Google search revealed that that was a different case, in Austin, TX. What was the name of the Marine who stopped the crazy guy on the NY subway and got prosecuted for it? I’m pretty sure it was Daniel something…

                  Ah. Found it: Daniel Penny. No wonder I was confused.

                  Like

                  1. A while back, I remember seeing a story about some woman complaining about “men not stepping forward” to defend women on sub-way cars.

                    I thought about Daniel Penny being prosecuted for “stepping forward”. 😡

                    Liked by 1 person

                2. That doesn’t change that Robin is correct.

                  Folks love to go “Why didn’t someone do something? But not that something, a thing that feels like it did more.”

                  A lot of very bad folks are in jail, now, because fokls were recording– and a lot of folks recording are not dead because there were five, six folks recording.

                  Like

                  1. Then accept that you’re rewarding men without chests and stop complaining when that attitude carries over to many other areas. That’s what “culture” means.

                    Like

                    1. No, doing something other than what you demand from behind the safety of your keyboard is not ‘rewarding men without chests’.

                      Especially not when their actions are frequently effective at the goal of saving the person being attacked, and removing the attacker, rather than flattering the fantasies of folks who aren’t even there.

                      Like

        3. The two guys who do The China Show occasionally talk about Chinese attitudes toward rendering aid. According to them, the big problem in China is scammers who fake distress, and then file a lawsuit claiming injury against the first person who touched them (somewhat similar to the practice in the US of throwing yourself over the hood of a car while crossing the street, and then claiming that the car bumped you and knocked you over). Usually when aid is rendered, what happens is that a foreigner who’s ignorant of this practice is the first person to assist. Once the foreigner is assisting, it becomes clear that the person is genuinely someone in need, and other bystanders join in to help. So in many cases it’s not that there aren’t Chinese willing to help. It’s that there’s so many scammers that jumping to assist whenever you see people in trouble is an invitation to fall victim to a scammer.

          However, in the incident at the Shanghai race, the problem appears to have been lowest common denominator employees with zero vetting or training by the people who hired them.

          Liked by 1 person

    4. The Chinese news reports on the matter mention safety reviews after the incident, but otherwise report nothing that suggests that there was anything wrong with the response to the crash.

      The respective teams of both Millroy and Hartog have announced that they will no longer compete in any GT championship races that are held in China.

      Unusually honest for China, and that is the correct response.

      Like

  20. Yep. Seen it on Instapundit and my local Denver Gazette comment section. Quick little declarative “Repeal the 19th!” posts. (Like banging your spoon on the high chair makes things like that happen.

    Of course, you’re right. It’s a psyop to create needed optics to perpetuate the silly Handmaidens hysteria.

    This seems to have become quite the cottage industry: Create untenable opinion calculated to reinforce the other side’s greatest fears. Where does naughty fun end and malicious social engineering begin?

    Way above my pay grade …

    Liked by 1 person

    1. “Where does naughty fun end and malicious social engineering begin?”

      I’m going to opine, based on nothing but my lyin’ eyes, that the fun stopped in 2010 and it’s been malicious foreign interference ever since.

      There’s an argument to be made that it started in the 1980s with Regan.

      Liked by 1 person

  21. Note that “Repeal the 19th” is subject to the same amplification as the Clancy supporters. It’s a fraction of a fraction of the Right who are even entertaining the idea, and we have no way of measuring how large that fraction is.

    Moreover, the only people who are getting exposed to the 19th talk are the terminally online. It’s not like you can say it at the water cooler. So the Dems only get their soundbite if (a) a politician says it, which they decidedly aren’t, or (b) some fool tries to start a movement.

    The latter is concerning but unlikely. Excluding bots, the bulk of the “Repeal the 19th” talk is an emotional reaction to the case, not a serious discussion. Once the emotion dies down, so will the rhetoric. Remember all the calls for Gaza to be exterminated after 10/7? How many were there a month later? I’m expecting a similar drop-off.

    Like

    1. [raises hand] I’d still like to see Gaza carpet-bombed from end to end. It’s the only way to prevent a repeat of 10/7 — or worse. They have spent 60 years making it clear that they will not stop murdering Jooos until they are dead.

      Like

      1. “…carpet-bombed from end to end…”

        Waste of perfectly good ammunition. Super expensive.

        Just stop giving them welfare. That would do it. In fact, it would be more than sufficient to the problem.

        Same with the “Migrant” invasion of Europe (and Canada!). Just stop giving them money. They’ll all go away within months.

        Please note that there are ZERO people suggesting that as a solution on the world stage, which tells me something about the world stage.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. Please note that there are ZERO people suggesting that as a solution on the world stage, which tells me something about the world stage.

          Mostly that the Pallywood propaganda showing starving chirruns would kick in the hyperdrive, and there’s too many Muslims infesting all our countries to risk the resulting intifada….. at least in their minds.

          Liked by 1 person

    2. “Repeal the 19th”

      Hmmm. How about return to only property owners have the franchise (regardless of sex)? That is where the US started. Do not own property. Do not get to vote. There is no specific amendment expanding the franchise beyond property owners (presumed male, but not sure lists males specifically).

      Hey it would stop the homeless, illegal, nursing home, round up votes.

      Not advocating for this, just pointing out there are historical factors.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. I’m not convinced that the childless leftists with two incomes don’t own more property than right-leaning folks.

        Like

        1. As far as that goes the franchise did not give the property owner votes (multiple implied) based on property size. Just one vote. But, there may more of them than conservative property owners with children.

          Did not say “this is what is needed”, just pointing out that the franchise started this way.

          Like

        2. Game my mom had us play was “game this rule.”

          For property ownership?

          Bog simple, sell folks square feet of land; also, rich folks gift their kids whatever the qualifying amount is as soon as it matters.

          Also works really well for preventing people from being able to leave horrible states.

          Like

      2. Out of all the “shake up the franchise” proposals, that and “net positive taxpayer” are the ones that make the most sense. But all of them would be gamed like crazy. You’d need something bulletproof to avoid thousands of politicians expanding their constituencies by, say, handing out tiny pieces of land or exempting certain benefits from the net taxpayer calculus.

        It’s not impossible to get right, but it’s very hard, and that’s before you get into how you would pass it, whether the outcomes are favorable, whether the outcomes are fair, etc.

        Ironically, we’re just starting to get good at playing the game as currently written. But the old Right/Left script went out the window when Trump took office, and we’re facing a lot of weird new problems (e.g., algorithm-poisoned Clancy supporters), so people are grasping at radical ideas in response.

        Like

    3. It’s less how noisy they are that’s caught my eye, because there’s been folks yelling it for decades at this point.

      What jumped out at me was how folks who have been on the right jumped on. Kevin Sorbo, several big name authors I won’t call down on Sarah’s blog, but the put it on their TwiX.

      Folks that I’ve supported when they objected to group-guilt for men, who claimed to support solid stances on baseline foundational principles of civilized nations.

      Which means they abandoned their principles the second it got in the way of their anger, spun up based off of a gossip-group that would make me be ashamed of my teen girls.

      Like

        1. It’s not rational, even if it is rationalized.

          And it wasn’t from Some Random Account that showed up last Tuesday. It’s from folks who set the standards, had respect– and proved themselves hypocrites.

          Which is why the damage done by this is going to take a long time to work out.

          I sure as hell am going to think twice, and probably do a timeline search, when someone calls for me to stick my neck out in support of a group they’ve got sympathy for.

          I’ll still do it if I search and find out someone was wronged, mind you, but it won’t be by promoting the folks who decided to get mad at me because they heard gossip that some other women did something they didn’t like.

          Like

  22. Someday I really need to write my “Why I am not a feminist” essay; even if I never post it anywhere it would be good to organize my thoughts on the matter.

    Like

  23. This is EXACTLY what I have been thinking from the start! Just about every other sensational child murder case I’m aware of was national news right from the time it happened or an arrest was made. Why would a case that happened 3 1/2 years ago and no one outside Massachusetts had heard of (I hadn’t) suddenly blow up the Internet? Unless someone or something was deliberately pushing it to the forefront?

    Like

    2. It’s got something for everybody: child murder, a bereaved father, a mother who was “failed by the system”, mental illness, over-prescription, postpartum depression and/or psychosis, a vile act of premeditation, and a handy scapegoat (the father) for the conspiracy crowd.

      So I’m not sure it needed that much of a push to go viral. I suspect a couple of sensational news stories or the true crime crowd on TikTok catching hold of it would do the trick. I’d be curious to know how it first spread and whether it was organic.

      I’m also curious how they pick which stories to push. Do they plant specific ones or amplify ones that are going viral? For actors like the CCP, do they have a specific plan, or does just amplifying outrage work? How many stories do they push that fail to get traction?

      Like

      1. Guys, I think I can get my MA in African-American studies with “The White Nationalist subtext of Lindsay Clancy’s horrific murder of those children”.

        That especially awful attorney is seventy five, which means we can speculate about when he got his law degree, and about what happened to his law program by then.

        The collectivist arguments are even worse than previously articulated.

        So, by 1975, certain universities had already gotten in legal trouble for ‘pro white advocacy’, and also people had long been appalled by cases like Emet Till (I am sure I have spelled this incorrectly), and the law schools had changed up what they were teaching.

        So Mr. Lawyer was never explicitly told that for the case of white criminals, and acts of callous indifference to human life, he should make sure that the jury contains only whites who are racists. He almost accomplished that goal, but he did not make sure to exclude the black man, and did not realize that this could be a critical error.

        Basically, the composition of the Jury, etc is pretty much a problem of counterfeit liberal arts education, an appallingly weak grasp of rhetoric and of differences of opinion, going back at least fifty years.

        We can actually twist this into “in hindsight, white supremacists voices were really valuable in academia and for academic freedom of speech, so legal compliance with the integration push was a bad thing”, and then try to call that compliance white nationalist.

        The white supremacist position, of terrorism, was not actually the popular one among Americans then, or they would have just kept on with the murders. We actually would have expected popularity seeking tertiary schools to discriminate against views so unpopular.

        Anyway, yeah, sure, we should totally amend the constitution so that highschool drop outs can vote, and people with real tertiary degrees can vote, but that people with fake tertiary degrees cannot vote. That is totally a rational position, a politicially feasible position, and a legal policy position that would ever make any sense at all. /sarcasm

        Like

    3. Never forget, folks, these are their heroes. Child murderers, drug addicted degenerates, violent criminals, looters, ‘mostly peaceful’ arsonists and raping murdering savages. Their villains are everybody trying to protect the innocent from those ‘heroes’.

      Like

  24. I don’t know if this is cause for hope or despair; but I just saw someone had posted the following out there in the interwebs:

    You will rue the roguish route your rude rouge ruse wrought.

    Like

  25. The repeal the 19th rhetoric is 13 different kinds of silly to me. Targeting all women for the stupidity of few is not a long term stable survival strategy. I think it was Heinlein once said words to the effect that: You don’t win a technological war with half your brain power. While it is true only a small percentage of women have both the brains and temperament to be scientists or engineers, only a small percentage of men are equipped for it either.

    Nevertheless, there does seem to be an active minority of women what are making it hard.

    Those who parade about in those ridiculous ketchup bottle costumes pretending there is some vague Christian conspiracy to enslave them. If they were serious, they would be wearing burkhas and criticizing Islam. Muslims really do seem to want women to be second class or lower citizens. The theory that those women are secretly quivering to be emburkhaed and regularly ravished by manly Muslim men is — well — consider the source.

    The strangle hands* crowd supporting Lindsey Clancy are not helping either. The notion that a disturbed mental state should be a consideration in sentencing is arguably reasonable. The idea she can be not guilty by reason of insanity and actually eligible for release in as few as 40 days (under Massachusetts law) is downright disturbing.

    I guess I can see the temptation to blame all women but I think that is just atavistic tribal collectivism surfacing where it should be held down and allowed to drown.

    * strangle hands: https://x.com/GPrime85/status/2094757663800234352?s=20

    Like

Comments are closed.