A lack of patriotism must be the cool thing for American youth; most throw up a little at the idea of conservative beliefs. Leaning right, however, doesn’t have to mean being anti-gay marriage, opposing woman’s right to choose, or embracing other extremists’ creeds.

It doesn’t have to, except in the 999 times out of 1,000 that it does.

Gavin she did say the whole thing could be avoided by creating some sort of test or school curriculum to license liberals. So relax and start studying.

I dunno, Ms. Sciandra.

Those “uneducated new-age hippie liberals who embraced anti-war ideologies” turned out to be right, after all. They were right from the beginning, while all the educated neocons and their supporters with all their “realistic and attainable plans” were completely fucking wrong.

Thank you, Gavin, for throwing us all on a thermite grenade of teh stupid.

IT IS A TRICK CREATURE!!!!!

Longer Stephanie Sciandra:

“If too many people fall into liberalism (or any set of beliefs, EXCEPT FOR CONSERVATISM BECAUSE WE’RE THE SMART GROWN-UP ONES WHO KNOW EVERYTHING NOT LIKE THOSE IGNORANT HIPPIES RUINING OUR NATIONAL MORAL BY PROTESTING AND BEING COOL WITHOUT FACTS OR REASONS BLARGH!) without realizing it, we might have WWIII on our hands.”

I have seen evil…and it is a white, upper middle-class college student with a overblown sense of her intelligence, animosity towards her fellow Americans and a disturbing desire to excuse genocide.

Ok, it just boils down to “You made me do it…because you’re annoying.”

That author sounds like one of those “I’m so hip to be part of the Establishment” groupies that the conservative movement inspired. Just stop. You’re not smart. You aren’t hip to be square. You’re ignorant and you have no conscience.

I don’t doubt that she has “hurt moral”. “No morals” is more like it. Haw haw haw….sorry.

THE EARHOLES HAVE DEVOURED THE HAIR BUT THE MOUTH AWAITS BEARD PUDDING!!

Jesus. Her picture almost takes up as many square inches as her column.

…And it’s twice the size of her brain! Run away!!!

Ah yes – with free-thinkers and liberalism everywhere now, there is only one proven remedy.

Caption: Do it liberals, do it.

In a nutshell:
I’m not looking to directly challenge those who embrace a liberal point of view, just sayin’ if too many people fall into liberalism… America may be in danger of becoming the next Third Reich..

The SPCA has a secret agenda?
Bwahaha.

“Much like neo-Nazis are not given much more attention than an occasional time slot on “Maury,” new-age hippie liberals who embrace anti-war ideologies and fly around college campuses with “bombs for oil” bumper stickers and call for the impeachment of Bush do nothing but hurt moral for those who actually attempt to make a difference in politics”

What?

Teh stupid, it buuuurns.

Her entire column is very difficult to understand. She seems to have several different themes–Dolchstoß; liberals are stupid and uninformed; not all Konservatives are Krazy Krackers; protesters are stupid and uninformed; hippies are passe; Konservatives are falsely maligned as passe–any one of which might make a readable, if thoroughly reich-a-rific column. But, instead of aiming for and hitting the bowl, she pisses all over the stall, TP and floor.

What’s she saying? It seems to be a litany of complaints, none of which have any thematic connection other than “I don’t like Liberals.” On the other hand, the sort-of-cute authoress at least didn’t call us fags, say we should be killed, etc. There’s–perhaps–some hope for this one.

I for one am above all this crass denigration of another person’s looks. That kind of rhetoric is beyond the pale.

On an entirely unrelated note, what do you guys think it would look like if I took a grapefruit, stretched a Crypt Keeper mask over it, and gave it a henna rinsed wig and a chemical peel?

This article is not very well written. It begins with the interesting premise that the U.S. is lurching towards a fascist dictatorship, but never develops the argument. At all. Even in a half-ass way.

Note to Stephanie: articles criticizing others’ education might best be written by someone educated. Or better yet, do what many up-and-coming young wingnut hacks do and plagiarize someone talented.

Actually, this column sounds like most of the crappy editorials I read in my college’s paper.

Her scattershot approach to the issue of “liberalism is free-thinking but conformist/conservatism is for grown-ups/not all conservatives are nuts/conservatives might have to kill all the liberals” is to be expected.

Echong Chris, the biggest problem I have is that the article is so very poorly written. The icing is the denigration of the education/knowledge of others who, as chance has it, to have been proven completely correct on Iraq. I gotta reiterate, though, I think she’s sort of attractive.

Those “uneducated new-age hippie liberals who embraced anti-war ideologies� turned out to be right, after all. They were right from the beginning, while all the educated neocons and their supporters with all their “realistic and attainable plans� were completely fucking wrong.

And nobody likes a smarty pants. She tells her caricature of liberals that “conservative leaners” aren’t all the caricature conservatives (stop calling us “enablers” shut up! shut up!) and assumes that they, the “new age hippie liberals” are operating out of ignorance because if they were truly informed (defined as “taking a political science class”), they’d really know something, and if they knew anything they’d agree with her (oh.my.god.I.hate.all.undergrads.) So if they knew more they’d have been wrong just like she was and it wouldn’t be rubbing in her face now and we’d all get along instead of being forced to the inevitable conclusion that American Imperialism never got a fair shake because it was betrayed by the Awesome Power of Campus Rallies.

It’s clear that conservatives all arrive at a set of uniform talking points by completely independent thought processes. Right?

All is not hopeless at Buffalo.edu.

Two words.

Photoshop. Celery.

How can you just throw in that SPCA secret agenda thing and not explain it? We just got a new cat from them. Do I need to be worried about Snowball hurting my moral when I try to make a difference? Details, please Stephanie!

Hold on a sec.

Shannon White is where it’s at.

new-age hippie liberals who embrace anti-war ideologies and fly around college campuses with “bombs for oil” bumper stickers and call for the impeachment of Bush do nothing but hurt moral for those who actually attempt to make a difference in politics.

“Hurt moral”?! Could someone at least explain to her the difference between “moral” and “morale”? What the hell?

Typical.

Why is she shining a flashlight on her face?

“…fly around college campuses with “bombs for oil” bumper stickers…”

this part is hilariously confusing! i have so many questions! are the new-age hippie liberals flying in airplanes? but they have bumper stickers…so maybe they have flying cars? that’s so rad! and who has a bumper sticker that says bombs for oil? wtf?

after reading this sentence over and over with my head cocked to the side in a distinctly inquisitive fashion, i have finally concluded that there are new-age hippie liberals who have the independent power of flight, and they have chosen to cover themselves in stickers, because hey, they can fly. they can do whatever they want! they’re swooping around the campus at ubuffalo, and as terrified students dive for cover, of course they sometimes misread the stickers! they’re afraid for their lives, and in some cases, for their ill-advisedly tall hats!

ps: sign me up for the liberals-who-can-fly club, once you start a california chapter. please and thank you!

new-age hippie liberals who embrace anti-war ideologies and fly around college campuses with “bombs for oil” bumper stickers and call for the impeachment of Bush do nothing but hurt moral for those who actually attempt to make a difference in politics.

Y’know, when I look at this a couple times, it starts (oh christ!) to make sense. See, I don’t think she’s talking about morale at all. I think, as an up-and-coming wingnut pundit wannabe, she’s decided to model her writing style on well known wingnut pundits – in this case the notorious pastor swank. She wants to say something about how these damn liberals have teh gutter morals, so she scrambles the words around like swank and comes up with “…do nothing but hurt moral…”. I think it’s kind of, well, swankerific….

mikey

This is a perfect example of what’s wrong with higher education these days. I’ll bet dollars to doughnuts that the papers she submits for her classes are written just as atrociously, yet she never receives anything less than a B- on them.

Maybe she means “morels” and thinks the dirty fucking hippies are high (flying) on magic mushrooms?

Nah, I got nothing. She’s an idiot.

It’s just a collection of random, unconnected statements that can’t be tested. I’m in awe. Seldom have I read that much text without being able to derive even a superficial point from it.

But I’m just a dirty fucking hippie with a flying car and bumperstickers.

Would I be a Facist if I mentioned the Thatcher Effect, and the grotesque expression you get if you invert the eyes and mouth in someone’s photograph? Not that I’m accusing you of Photoshop chicanery.

free thinkers are what?

Freethought is a philosophical viewpoint that holds that beliefs should be formed on the basis of science and logical principles and not be comprised by authority, tradition, or any other dogma. The cognitive application of freethought is known as freethinking, and practitioners of freethought are known as freethinkers.(thanks wiki)
Is that what I am or have become?
Do I need me some dogma to get right?

We’re just gonna have to find someone who knew her before she was a virgin.

Putting aside the article’s opacity and total lack of a point, I think everyone can agree that the Conformists surrendered the privilege to make fun of New Agers on the day they decided to treat the Book of Revelations as a foreign policy document.

Now if you’ll excuse me, I have to pick up my Flying Hippiemobile from its 30-Minute Chakra Balancing (free vacuum job and sandalwood air freshener with coupon!).

I like how she follows a statement like,

Leaning right, however, doesn’t have to mean being anti-gay marriage, opposing woman’s right to choose, or embracing other extremists’ creeds.

with,

If you don’t understand and truly believe the core of what you adhere to, don’t expect your opinions to be taken seriously or even recognized as anything more than a nuisance.

Right-wing ignorance is best when it’s served with arrogance.

modest dresses for modest women – check out the last pic – kinky!

Oh, the poor little thing.

On the other hand: Ridiculing the bad writing, faulty logic and laughable pomposity of a college kid is rather like shooting fish in a barrel. c’mon.

If you google “Bombs for oil” bumper sticker you get a couple of hits. One is for a comment in a Kos diary from ’05 which mis-referenced the bumper sticker mentioned in the diary itself. The bumper sticker was “No blood for oil” and the comment quoted it as “No bombs for oil.”

Another hit is a reference to a modern punk band that has a song titled “Bombs for Oil.”

Assuming that this punk band (The New Breed) even has issued a bumper sticker with the title of one of their songs on it, what self-respecting flying hippie would even own one?

t4toby-

THAT is the best laugh I’ve had all week.

Next Contest: The FRAHM FOTOSHOP FANTASY!!

Depict your Favorite wingnut in an Art-Frahm inspired montage! Celery Required!!

Do You Have ODGD? ODGD stands for Organization Definciency Guilt Disorder. Take the below quiz, to see if you may have ODGD.

I’d find this lady hilarious if she wasn’t recommending beating kids with a goddamn rod, as per old testament instructions.

Why is she shining a flashlight on her face?

Because she’s…so…scared…right now…

Liberals in a tizzy here when the fact is, she nailed you punks and your twisted beliefs. Now you can’t deny that your behavior means it will go bady for all liberals when your agenda is esposed.

She has such pretty hair (well, for a TRICK CREATURE!!!). Meh. Why does she have to be so wingnutty? IT IS A MYSTER– wait, I gotta stop that. Right. Anyway, redhead tribalism being what it is, I’m forced to admit she’s cute. But she’s no Marie Jon’.

Yes, that’s it. Ok. I feel better now. Sorry Stephanie, but I already have one wingnut enchantress and that’s enough!

Slow day Gav?

I enjoy ripping on college students as much as the next snark addict, but this was like making fun of the handicapped.

I gotta run and get bombed for oil.

I just want to know where are all these dirty fucking hippies who are supposed to be rebelling against the S.P.C.A. Look, I’ve been telling you guys for years that their a front for the Moon Corporation, but nobody has joined my boycott of green cheese.

but this was like making fun of the handicapped.
Shooting fruit in a barrel. Picking the low-hanging fish.

Tonight’s lesson in trackback jack fishing: Picking the right lure.

you can’t deny that your behavior means it will go bady for all liberals

Oh noes! It’s the acopolypse or something. Now is the time with it all goes bady…

mikey

But the lips, the lips …

I’ve just noticed the uncanny resemblance to Yde Girl.

She looks just like that girl in west marin who gave me the crabs in 1968…

mikey

That article didn’t make any sense at all. What the hell is she even trying to say?? I don’t think she knows, she’s just sure she doesn’t like them dirty libruls with their insane anti-war ideas. I mean, what kind of a maniac would be against war??? It’s out largest export for Yahweh’s sake!!

The must have run out of column inches for her story and had to edit out the part where she talks about how she is joining the military next week.

Gotta agree with the others that pointed out that this is just too easy.

She’s a fuckin kid. She’s just trying to piss of her parents.

TRICK CREATURE!!!

HTML:

Not to seem ignorant, but what the heck is a “Trick Creature”?

I think I saw that image in the sky above, a blood moon and blood for oil.

Y’know, I don’t really get the whole thing about criticizing wingnut women by saying that they look like frankenstein or the Yde Girl or whatever. It is funny to think about, but then you look back Sciandra’s picture and see that she doesn’t look like a mummy, she’s an attractive woman. An attractive woman who writes like she has severe ADD, and who believes some strange things.

mikey, mikey, mikey. Did you learn nothing from the roughhousing you received at Twisty’s? Apparently not.

Chris: “This article is not very well written. It begins with the interesting premise that the U.S. is lurching towards a fascist dictatorship, but never develops the argument.”

If Sciandra would run with the idea she’d just prove those dronish, protesting liberals are right after all.

Now you can’t deny that your behavior means it will go bady for all liberals when your agenda is esposed.

Wow. I thought nothing could make less sense than Stephanie, but I was wrong.

When will my agenda be esposed? Oh, when? When will someone court my agenda, send it flowers, and then, someday, tenderly pop the question so that it will forever be happy and esposed in blessed matrimony?

I think we can expect really big things from this young woman.

Our behavior? Does it mean that we will get too drunk at the reception and puke on our bridesmaid shoes? And maybe end up fucking the best man in the ladies bathroom?

Okay, Sciandra’s “To the protesting masses” is somewhat muddled. But you have to admit, her “Five necessities to enhance any wardrobe” is a paragon of lucidity.

That column was one steaming pile of stupid.

And to think my brother goes to the same school as her. Yikes.

I don’t get it? I can’t even figure out what point she’s trying to make.

I think she’s just an enigma wrapped in a riddle.

I think she’s just going for a hilarious Krauthammer imitation.

“There’s a difference between being liberal, being conservative and not knowing what you’re talking about.”

Should this be, “There’s a difference between being liberal, andbeing conservative, which means, not knowing what you’re talking about.

Its the least I could do, Billy.

Yes, its like shooting fish in a barrel, but have you ever shot fish in a barrel?

That shit is fun!

The only thing more fun is fishing with dynamite, ala the Tripplets of Belleville.

I was teaching my students this week about the end of World War I and the dolchstosslegende, and drew an explicit comparison between the promulgation of this legend by von Ludendorff and others immediately after WW I, and the current promotion of this meme among neoconservatives. I just hope that in 10 years when this canard is advanced, my students remembered what I taught them.

Take that, David Horowitz!

Help! Flying hippies with bumper stickers! HELP!

If I didn’t have a penis I’d say something about how she’s not actually attractive, she’s just young. But that’d be oppressive.
I will say that she reminds me why I’m trying to avoid being a professor for as long as i possibly effing can.

Yeah, she gets B-‘s, but can you imagine the stink she’d raise if you failed her as she’d likely deserve?
Or rather, the stink she’d have her parents raise for her.

I’m going to google her in about 3 years and if she’s still writing stuff like this I’m totally going to make fun of her.

mikey, mikey, mikey. Did you learn nothing from the roughhousing you received at Twisty’s? Apparently not.

Roughhousing? Nope. That wasn’t a roughhousing. That was nothing short of a wingnutian tribal collective attack on someone who questioned tribal dogma. Nothing to be learned from that…

mikey

A pair of well fitting clogs are not only a way to keep your feet warm, dry and blister free, but you can wear them with almost every outfit. They’re inexpensive, and a good choice as far as keeping your feet and back injury free.

Plus, you get to stomp the bejeezus out of anyone who comes near you.

Doktor, that Thatcher effect was really quite disturbing: I suspect that she had a wrangler in No. 10 whose job it was to make sure her eyes and mouth were the right way up when she went out the door. Man, she was one scary woman. Imagine the panic if she left the house looking like that.

And Missy Stephanie does indeed look a bit Yde-ish, although she has less forehead. Mind you, a pub full of drunk Glaswegians would have less forehead than the Yde girl.

And it seems that, despite having a forehead that almost approaches Ydeness, she’s not using it to store her brain in. That rambling screed was a big, wiffling, pretentious piece of shite. I like how she said this:

Leaning right, however, doesn’t have to mean being anti-gay marriage, opposing woman’s right to choose, or embracing other extremists’ creeds.

but neglected to follow on with this:

It does, however, mean hating Teh Gays, removing women’s right to choose, and of course bombing the buggeryfuck out of anyone who’s Not Quite Our Class, Sweetie.

Funny, innit: did she have a column when Bush was actually popular saying that people liked him because they were really stoopid and swayed by the rightist propaganda? Or is it only when the majority agrees with the left that that happens?

Let me be the last to note that she’s on the right track, wing-nut-wise. This is a klassik “I’m-muh-toor” lecture to the childish childlike children of the left.

After all:

“…new-age hippie liberals who embrace anti-war ideologies and fly around college campuses with “bombs for oilâ€? bumper stickers and call for the impeachment of Bush do nothing but hurt moral for those who actually attempt to make a difference in politics.”

Yeah, yeah, “moral,” etc. But it’s the whiny, put-upon class prig’s use of “actually” that announces her arrival as Queen of the Wingge-Nutte Prom.”

(And “…who attempt to make a difference” is cherce. “We’re the responsible ones, Dean! Not those anarchists with their Frisbees.”)

Welcome, Your Highness.

I don’t really get the whole thing about criticizing wingnut women by saying that they look like frankenstein or the Yde Girl or whatever.
You’re right, Atheist, the Yde link was out of line. I can only say in my defense that I was Drunk on the Power of Snark. It would help, mind you, if people would provide less unflattering photographs of themselves; it is if they are trying to provoke us into throwing rotten fruit.

Around midnight at every party, I used to be ready to chop my feet off. After prancing around in high heels and open toed stilettos for about a semester, I realized that no one looks at your feet anyway, so, one night, I just chopped the ugly motherfuckers right off.

Love, Stumpy

She tells her caricature of liberals that “conservative leaners� aren’t all the caricature conservatives (stop calling us “enablers� shut up! shut up!) and assumes that they, the “new age hippie liberals� are operating out of ignorance because if they were truly informed (defined as “taking a political science class�), they’d really know something, and if they knew anything they’d agree with her (oh.my.god.I.hate.all.undergrads.)

See, the amazing thing is, I noticed something about my political science courses and my history courses: Anything approaching intellectual rigor or honesty is absent from the former, and all the professors from the latter are in the “United Campus Thingamawhatsits for Peace-Train and Justice”.

You’d almost think there’s a connection there or something.

mikey: “wingnuttian”? You surely jest. Radical feminism is just too much for ya, admit it. There’s nothing more far-left/liberal than radical feminism. Can you handle it? I don’t think so.

Oh, I admit it. I’ve never been comfortable with extremist ideologies. I can’t handle any ideology that disregards reason, whether it’s Ace of Spades or Twisty. I know I didn’t go to college, but I’m gonna go with the theory that it’s pretty easy to spot extremist nutjobs, wherever they fall on the political spectrum…

mikey

Don;t kid yourself, she’ll be Dolchstosslegendeing when she’s 50.

Good gawd. That young woman is seriously confused, seriously stoopid, or both…. Perhaps she ought to spend more time reading amd less time writing. At least until she’s outgrown her training wheels.

Cheers,

Steve said:

It’s clear that conservatives all arrive at a set of uniform talking points by completely independent thought processes. Right?

I think you misspelled “stochastic” there. If you’re not sure of where, why, any place it fits!

Cheers,

DocAmazing said:

I think we can expect really big things from this young woman.

My guess would be a high-paid sinecure in the Iran reconstruction programs.

Cheers,

“Leaning right, however, doesn’t have to mean being anti-gay marriage, opposing woman’s right to choose, or embracing other extremists’ creeds.”

No. but it does mean voting for assholes who do who do.

Oh, and upthread Dan someone said “I’ll bet dollars to doughnuts that the papers she submits for her classes are written just as atrociously, yet she never receives anything less than a B- on them.”

He’s absolutely right. In fact, three days ago I gave a B- minus for horseshit like this to quite a number of students. After reading about 25 of these things at a clip- and most of mine are 5-to-7 pages long – I have quite the splitting headache. Sometimes, though, I decide to get drunk first. They still get a B- but that’s because now I find them pretty funny. And I don’t get my headache until the next day.

Arne, I think not. Stochastic implies some degree of randomness, and wingnut opinion-forming looks to be a wholly deterministic process.

My guess would be a high-paid sinecure in the Iran reconstruction programs.

I think your guess is right. At least, that seems to be what she’s aiming at. “But my big brother got one, why can’t I have one? Waaaaaaaaah! Wanna wanna wanna!” And so on.

Do you think that anyone has yet pointed out to her that she seems to be saying (amongst all the pretentious wankery) “When everyone agrees with us, it’s an expression of democracy, but when everyone agrees with libruls, it’s because they’re all lazy brainwashed hippies”?

She’s perfectly cute, people. The lighting does indeed suck, though.

mikey: “I can’t handle any ideology that disregards reason, whether it’s Ace of Spades or Twisty.”

Oh, nice. Conflate Twisty with Ace of Spades. One is intellectualized radical feminism, the other is “teh” stupid wingnuttery. Is that your intention, mikey? To equate the sublime “I Blame the Patriarchy” with something as dull-witted as “Ace of Spades”? If so, why?

“Yeah, okay, it isn’t terribly sporting to pick on a college student, Dolchstosslegende or no.”

I disagree. College is your last chance to really get the last few pats in on the mental play-doh of developing minds.

University of BUFFALO?! Yeah, someone just forfeited her right to hide behind academia. Freaking Buffalo…

Yes, its like shooting fish in a barrel, but have you ever shot fish in a barrel? That shit is fun!

Why would a fish want to live in a barrel? That does not make sense!
The defense rests.

When will my agenda be esposed? Oh, when? When will someone court my agenda, send it flowers, and then, someday, tenderly pop the question so that it will forever be happy and esposed in blessed matrimony?

Baahaahaaahaaa!

Thanks for knocking that one out of the park. It was low and over the plate, but you swatted the skin off of it.

To equate the sublime “I Blame the Patriarchy� with something as dull-witted as “Ace of Spades�? If so, why?

Because the mean nasty feminazis want to take away the good progressive boys’ tranny jokes, I believe.

You guys just make the point for me. Look, believe anything that you want, but if you can’t recognize that your beliefs are extreme and that you pull together to attack people who disagree with you just like the worst of the wingnuts, you aren’t being honest. Just look at your own writings…

mikey

Oh, and I don’t believe I’ve ever made a “tranny joke” in my life. Not even certain i know what one is. So there you go smacking around a straw man – hmm, just like ace of spades. Next are you gonna take a whack at my spelling?

mikey

Well, now that you mention it …

Ahh, herr doktor, the Chewbacca Defence.

In honor of St Patty’s Day, BRILLIANT!

If only we could figure out how to incorporate Mr. Hankey…

Oh, grow up! There is no such “popular old saying” even remotely similar to, “You are liberal till you grow up.” You made it up in your tiny little pinhead like the other phony quotes and sayings conservatard authoritarians are so fond of, like Lincoln wanted to hang Senators or all the founders were bible thumping Christians! If you want an education, drop out of college and learn to use “T3h Googl3”. It may not make you smart but you might beciome preznit some day.

I’m not sure what chapter it is in but Altemeyer even noted this in his groundbreaking study on Authoritarians that John Dean, Glenn Greenwald and others have written so much about.

“Conservative by the time you’re 35” is a quote falsely attributed to Churchill:

“If you’re not a liberal when you’re 25, you have no heart. If you’re not a conservative by the time you’re 35, you have no brain.”

There is no record of anyone hearing Churchill say this. Paul Addison of Edinburgh University makes this comment: “Surely Churchill can’t have used the words attributed to him. He’d been a Conservative at 15 and a Liberal at 35! And would he have talked so disrespectfully of Clemmie, who is generally thought to have been a lifelong Liberal?”

she has no clue whether or not anti war protestors are leftists or rightists. she talks about liberalism and conservatism as though an aversion to war is necessarilly the province of one rather than the other. she is completely programmed by 40 years of republican criminlas insisting that “liberal” means one is a traitor to the country. So, naturally anyone who is against war must hate their country and therefore they are liberals. dolt.

Why is it unfair to pick on a smug lying future townhall contributer?

#100 is mine, bitchez!

There’s nothing more far-left/liberal than radical feminism.

Thanks for admitting it. Though I wouldn’t call it ‘radical feminism’, which is way too nice a name with too nice a pedigree to be sullied by association. More like, overinvested PC bullshit and cultural stalinism. They’re like those PETA people who sit outside supermarkets and throw hot dog pieces at soccer moms and kids; it’s not ‘radical’, it’s batshit.

Not to seem ignorant, but what the heck is a “Trick Creature�?

A reference to Gavin’s caption. Which in turn is a reference to the anti-Fat Joke crusaders who consider us Nazis, as well to this.

Look, believe anything that you want, but if you can’t recognize that your beliefs are extreme and that you pull together to attack people who disagree with you just like the worst of the wingnuts, you aren’t being honest.

Mikey, I recognize that my beliefs are extreme, but I have no interest in attacking you or anyone else. I just disagree with you about radicalism and spelling.

This crap reminds me of that scene toward the end of “Hannibal,” you know, the one with Ray Liotta. With Ms. Sciandra in the Liotta role. It explains so much!

overinvested PC bullshit

HTML, I wonder what you think of this: http://www.kaichang.net/2006/11/the_sloppy_prop.html

mikey: Oh, and I don’t believe I’ve ever made a “tranny joke� in my life. Not even certain i know what one is.

Example:

Two GM Powerglides walk into a bar, sit down at a table. Waitress rolls up and says to the shorter one, “Is that at torque converter in yer pocket or are you just happy to see me?” The taller one smiles, “Its a torque converter. Now, quick, bring us two shots of heavy gear oil and send one to that fat chick at the end of the bar.

Hmmm, I can see why you don’t dabble in them, mikey…

FSA:

I’ve been thinking about that lately, actually, though I hadn’t seen that particular post before.

I know ‘PC’ is a loaded cliche, full of baggage I’d rather not associate with. But there isn’t another easy term for ‘overinvested, language-policing, strategically-misguided movement incapable of performing moral triage.’

One can be anti-racist, -sexist, etc without being a Stalinist about it and without degenerating, for that matter, into making the argument that ‘looksism’ and ‘fat acceptance’ are some sort of civil rights issues cut from the same cloth.

Refer to the Feministe flamewar or the Coulter thread here for more.

Sorry, but there is nothing less “left” than identity politics.

A left analysis is one that looks to find the commonality in the structures that oppress people, not the commonality in the people that oppress people.

When you’re reduced to saying things like “All whites are racist” or “All men are sexist” and think that you have stated something other than a trivial truth (akin to “all dogs are mammals”), you have left the Left and joined the church.

Which you are welcome to do, btw – it’s a free country, after all. Just don’t be surprised that when your conversion techniques involve standing in the public square and hectoring sinners, you don’t get a lot of converts.

Mikey, I saw the Twisty exchange–I would’ve had your back but a) it was days after the fact and b) people like that bring me to a boil such that I can only sputter impotently, and you would’ve been like, dude, stay off my side.

Don’t even sweat it. They’re bullies. Radfem my ass; I know plenty of way-out radicals who manage to battle valiantly without being complete assholes. And, incidentally, plenty of squishy middle-of-the-roadsters who are huuuuge assholes, like, well, me. Assholity trumps ideology.

Keep in mind, Twisty’s the same font of wisdom who pegs fellatio as anti-feminist because it puts a woman in a supplicant position. See, you don’t want your dick sucked, you just want a woman kneeling in front of you. Kinda like how you drink in order to flex your biceps.

What Jillian said, mostly.

The rise of identity politics was the result of trying to push forward on social justice issues while turning away from the practical (legislative, economic) tools that had historically been used to bring about social justice. It is the answer to the question, “How can we be on the side of the underdog without disrupting the economic structures that require an underdog to make them work”

Like public religious piety, it is a moral pose that makes no demands (and offers no solutions) beyond the pose itself, so “progress” is defined by making the pose ever more contorted and baroque.

But how is it Stalinist to ask people to think? I mean, if my first thought after reading any of your posts is, “Oh my God he has red hair! Hahahaha! He couldn’t possibly have anything interesting to say ’cause of his hair!” it would probably be in my best interest to reflect on my goofy notions about redheads before sharing my impressions with the world. If I do decide to go with the redhead angle, I wouldn’t particularly mind if someone pointed out that I was, you know, oppressing your hair.

Refer to the Feministe flamewar or the Coulter thread here for more.

No! Not that!

See, you don’t want your dick sucked, you just want a woman kneeling in front of you.

What if I stand on my head?

But, FSA, if you say something substantive about HTML’s post, and then crack on him for being a redhead – well, that’s comedy.

Or it might be – if you do the crack well. If it isn’t, don’t blame me….I’m not especially funny, either.

And I blame poststructuralism and postmodernism for the rise of identity politics, really. But that’s hardly surprising – there’s not a lot that I am unwilling to blame Derrida or Foucault for. Hell, if you catch me on a bad day, I just might blame them for global warming and that mole I have next to my belly button.

mikey: I’ve never thrown a hot dog at a soccer mom in my life. I’ve also never accused you of making a tranny joke.

But if all you have is the crack about the hair, you’re not funny at all.

I’d hit it.

When you’re reduced to saying things like “All whites are racist� or “All men are sexist� and think that you have stated something other than a trivial truth (akin to “all dogs are mammals�), you have left the Left and joined the church.

By the way, Jillian, I agree with this.

I hear you, FSA. I really do.

I don’t think there’s been a lot of “just poking fun at people’s appearance without regards to substance” going on around here, or anywhere else that I tend to hang out online. I think that this has been one of the two or three confused sort of allegations that have been floating around, but I don’t think it’s accurate.

People are, as always, free to disagree with me on that score. People may think that all that ever happens on liberal comedy blogs is making fun of ugly people, or that it’s fifty percent of what goes on, or it’s 12.234%, and you automatically lose your liberal credentials the minute you cross the 12.1% threshold, or whatever.

But those who have been making arguments to this effect (or any other effect, for that matter) just haven’t convinced many people at this point. Doesn’t mean they’re wrong; they’re just not persuasive. Obviously, *I* think they’re wrong, otherwise I would’ve been persuaded, but….oh, shit. This is starting to sound like the arguments I would have when I was a drunk philosohpy undergrad. I’ll stop now.

My point is that while I agree with your hypothetical, I just don’t see it as having happened, so it’s a moot point.

Can I get you a beer?

Amen to what Jillian said, but expanding on her point: I hate these Stalinists because they would deprive the world of almost all satires and parodies. Like all Stalinists, since they want to politicize everything, they would take away some of the joys of life that should remain without rules: art, literature, sex, humor.

Also:

But, FSA, if you say something substantive about HTML’s post, and then crack on him for being a redhead – well, that’s comedy.

This is exaclty right, FSA. Some of the clueless dullards over um *there* tried to say that we what did to Daffy was no different than a wingnut’s “Michael Moore is fat” routine. But of course it’s not. We’d already substantively dealt with Daffy’s egregious arguments. The sandwich photoshop made it funny and also underlined a point.

But they *hate* funny. Or, rather, their idea of funny is “Daffy ab Hugh makes illogical arguments!!”

Sounds like she’s well qualified for a cabinet level position in this administration.

HAHAHA! Look what the redhead said!

Firecrotch! neener neener!

For the record, I don’t think she’s bad-looking at all. Not that it would matter if I did.

Too bad she seems unable to think.

And another thing. I’m especially not going to tell a woman how to think of feminism. I only comment on the subject when I’m condemned by certain ‘feminists’ as a borderline Nazi. But that tact is not reciprocated on the other side in re: sex. What I’m getting at is Twisty’s rule that bjs are evil. Isn’t Twisty a lesbian? I’m trying to think of how I’d feel if a gay man told me there were certain positions and styles of sex that were offlimits to me, a heterosexual. I’m thinking I wouldn’t reply too charitably, because I’d never presume to tell a gay man what he can and can’t do in the bedroom. Also, I’m thinking of a lot of the misogyny some gay men feel (was it Auden or Burroughs who’d always complain in his letters about the yukkyness of ‘the wound’, i.e. the vagina?) Nope, I’d say fuck off — ‘You have no frame of reference here, Donny, you’re like a child who wanders in in the middle of a movie…’. And while a lot of the ‘feminists’ appear to disagree with Twisty, they don’t seem to be telling her to fuck off like they would someone else (say, a MAN) who presumed to chastise them for certain sexual activity. Feel free to correct me if they have, but the cynic in me says that they don’t because they recognise a superior sexual Stalinist, and dont want to be on that Stalinist’s shitlist — they fear her as much as they admire her, which is also a classic apparatchik theme.

HAHAHA! Look what the redhead said!

Firecrotch! neener neener!

Gah! The outrage! This is ‘cut from the same cloth’ as racism and sexism! I demand an apology! Your politics are *impure*, Jillian!

And yes, I realize I just did do what I said I wouldn’t. But Christ, if some wingnut told me I should refrain from cunnilingus because it empowers the feminist movement, I’d tell them to fuck off and die.

Wait, I actually have been told by a certain homophobe that heterosexual anal sex is actually homosexual and therefore evil, and I did tell them they were stupid.

The point is that there should be no rules for sex except that both participants be consenting and of age. So Stalinists of the Left can fuck off just as much as Fascist on the Right.

I don’t think there’s been a lot of “just poking fun at people’s appearance without regards to substance� going on around here, or anywhere else that I tend to hang out online. I think that this has been one of the two or three confused sort of allegations that have been floating around, but I don’t think it’s accurate.

I’m not going to go scrounging around through the other threads, but I don’t remember too many arguments for the repression of all laughter at the expense of others. I could be wrong, though. And yes to the beer, Jillian!

HTML, I have a confession to make about Daffy’s sandwich. I had no idea it was supposed to be a fat joke; I thought it was a dig at the kind of food served at geek conventions. AND THAT’S NOT FUNNY!

Also, I’m starting to think there are two “theres.”

What I’m getting at is Twisty’s rule that bjs are evil.

This a rule like Daffy’s sandwich is a directive.

FSA, the sandwich joke *was* laughter at another person’s expense.

Pretty much *all* laugher is laughter at another person’s expense.

Perhaps someone could draw up a list of what personal attributes of another person can be deemed acceptable to be laughed at? And then we could put someone in charge of the list, and all comedy blogs could then submit their posts for approval to the list moderator?

This would help to clarify things immensely. No longer would there be a risk of having some ally who identifies with one of the attributes the wingnuts get mocked about feeling slighted. There could once again be harmony as we march in lockstep toward a brighter, blander future!

Mr. Mencken:

*Speaking for myself, I’d consider it rude to go visit someone’s web site and tell her to fuck off. If I don’t enjoy what I read at someone’s site I don’t go there anymore.

*Twisty is brilliant and hilarious. I don’t agree with her on everything. For example, I’ve always enjoyed giving blow jobs. If it is her view is that fellatio is “evil” or whatever, she’s entitled to her opinion, and maybe I missed it, but I don’t recall Twisty dictating a revision to the feminist handbook prohibiting the practice.

*Twisty’s readers don’t tremble in fear that she might disapprove of dissension. Jeezus, it’s a fucking BLOG. Her readers are not a bunch of brainwashed, terrorized underlings forced against our will into a hierarchical, what is it, “Stalinist”?, intellectual construction. Lighten up, young man. You’re taking it all way too personal, I think.

*I’ve been on the receiving end of a few brickbats over at Twisty’s too. Big fucking deal. If you can’t stand the heat, you know what to do.

Or, to clarify:

There’s nothing funny about having big boobs and wearing low cut sweaters. Having big boobs, wearing low cut sweaters, and arguing for modesty in dress is, however, hysterical.

There’s nothing funny about being gay. There’s nothing funny about being a Republican. Being gay and being a member of the Republican party – this Republican party – is, however, hysterical.

There’s nothing funny about beastiality. There’s nothing (inherently) funny about standing up for “traditional family values” (Fred Phelps does it, and he’s just scary). Neal Horsely is, however, hysterical.

There’s nothing funny about being a fat person. There’s nothing funny about playing a lot of Doom (I love Doom). There’s nothing funny about making ill-informed military policy proclamations. But if you put those three together, you have hit a perfect storm of comedy.

Actually, Jillian, beastiality IS funny…

mikey

MzNicky:

What about writing a post telling them to fuck off, titled ‘fuck off’, and linking it to their site?

Anyway, you’re more tolerant than many of those who participated in the flame war, who decided that our fat joke was so egregious they were going to stop reading us (especially stop reading us since Gavin, Brad and I didn’t consent to ‘re-education’).

Mikey: Just look at your own writings…

Man, I haven’t written anything.

Seriously, though, I’ve had disagreements with people at Feministe, and I’ve had disagreements with Twisty, and I’ve had disagreements with all kinds of people, and I don’t start twitching and shouting “STALINISTS! HELP HELP I’M BEING OPPRESSED!”

For what it’s worth, if you’re going to accuse people of being ultra-PC dickheads, Maoist is probably a better epithet. They’re the ones who came up with the idea of ideological correctness as a goal of a leftist movement.

One of the newest trends in fashion are blazers over everything.

OK, maybe her fashion advice is spot on — how the hell would I know what the “hep cats” are wearing in college these days? — but she needs some serious remedial work on SENTENCE CONSTRUCTION. Subject-verb agreement… don’t they teach that in, like, fifth grade?

You is oppressive.

Grammar are, too.

Jillian- I’m intrigued by your ideas and wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

Seriously, you should have a blog.

“blazers over everything.”

Blazers über alles!

Holy crap, that stoner dude is a REDHEAD?!?!

That’s it, I’m on Twisty’s side.

The above just goes to demonstrate, I think, that a couple of people can actually have different opinions and still agree on some basics, without turning ugly. But when it becomes a pile-on, and the arguments start coming in bad faith, it just becomes pointless and aggravating and establishes nothing except antipathy between the parties.

For my part, I regularly visit and enjoy both Feminste and Twisty’s place. I think they have some very good writers, and make excellent points, and often I come away thinking seriously about whether I might be who they are talking about. But (and this is especially true at IBTP) I don’t go wading into a big discussion thereabouts without making sure my cup is on. If not a full redman suit; they’re playing for keeps.

But I don’t go there looking for teh funny or teh snark.

Jeez, didja notice this flamewar just won’t die?

There’s nothing funny about being a fat person. There’s nothing funny about playing a lot of Doom (I love Doom). There’s nothing funny about making ill-informed military policy proclamations. But if you put those three together, you have hit a perfect storm of comedy.

And the first and third items together make for a recurring trope on left political humor blogs, one that did not originate with Sadly, No!’s infamous sub. I notice, for example, that Freedom Pundit makes a cameo in the Glenn Reynolds photoshop competition.

Twisty is brilliant and hilarious.

I agree MzNicky, and I’m a mere Leninist.

What about writing a post telling them to fuck off, titled ‘fuck off’, and linking it to their site?

HTML, correct me if I’m wrong, but I think the ‘fuck off’ post was from Feministe, not Twisty.

Y’know, FSA, I read your link, and sorry, but it’s crap. “Underlying every complaint of ‘PC’ is the absurd notion that members of dominant mainstream society have been victimized by an arbitrarily hypersensitive prohibition against linguistic and cultural constructions that are considered historical manifestations of bigotry.”
Um,
no.
I’m not denying the point that bigots use the term PC as a means of dismissing legitimate criticism, that’d be ridiculous. But it’s just as ridiculous to, essentially, say that any negative reference to the term is a form of bigotry. There’s a lot to criticize in the movement to control language by certain groups. I think it’s fucking stupid on countless levels. While since I’m a well off white man one might say my views here are meaningless, at the risk of marginalizing myself further here, if one were to say that they’d prove themselves as bigoted as the well off white men who I resemble almost only in appearance.
PC is counterproductive, just to begin with. Trying to control other people’s language antagonizes those people, quite naturally. In a way it’s simply lazy. Instead of trying to educate bigots, or their children, and try and break the cycle of hatred, there’s an element of simply screaming “stop it stop it stop it” and expecting everyone to obey.
Then there’s the hypocrisy, as penis and rape and white men jokes are ok, so long as it’s the white guy who’s the target. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not claiming victimization, i don’t give a shit. But it is hypocritical, as is the fact it’s mostly, in my experience, well off white women who use PC as a form of charity, to show how nice they are to the ‘lesser’ races. Them or college kids still in an understandably reactionary mode.
And the greater hypocrisy is the main problem, for me. You can’t force someone to be tolerant. You can teach them to be, or teach them things that might lead them to enlightenment, but you can’t force it. All you do is drive those beliefs underground and reinforce them.
And that’s my rant, most likely to be ignored or assaulted for being patriarchal. But, as many have said, the PC urge is not leftist. It’s not progressive. It’s radical, dogmatic, and hypocritical. If you want to control what someone else thinks or says, you’re not a liberal. It’s that simple, to me at least.

If you’re old enough to compose crap like this and try to promulgate it via the internet, you’re old enough to be mocked for your stupidity, hypocrisy, inconsistency, and the fascist implications of the point you apparently were trying to make at some point in the short life of your piece.

Being mocked for your name and/or appearance?  Well, that’s just an extra service that Sadly, No! offers.

Sorry. Didn’t proofread that, kinda clunky.

Well, thinking that all men are sexist and all white people are racist sort of cuts into the whole “brilliant” factor.

But that doesn’t mean it’s not possible to be allies.

As far as me having a blog of my own, I’d love to, but it would cut into the time I spend on coddling my male oppressors.

Seriously, I just work too much. Hopefully my schedule will calm down in a year or two. (This is another reason that rich women sitting around telling the rest of us the proper position to take on an issue really chaps my caboose so much – must be nice to sit in your loft in Manhattan and tell all the plebes how to live their lives).

diffbrad, that ain’t clunky. But while I read that and go “well, duh,”I think getting your point might be a generational thing–it seems like only people within a few years of my own age remember that time (granted, it wasn’t long–like two weeks or so) when PC was an actual lefty deal and not just an all-purpose straw tackle dummy for conservos.

I tell people horror stories about the early 90s and everyone my age nods sagely; everyone younger or older says I’m full of shit (Which is generally true, but not about how excruciating it was to spend my formative years surrounded by virtue-oozers). Read David Brock’s origin story in Blinded by the Right and you’ll see why there’s such a spike in knee-jerk right-leaning contrarianism among thirtysomethings.

Oh, and Jillian, I’m gonna get the Chinese characters for that line of yours about a “brighter, blander future” tattooed on my back–I owe ya anything?

I don’t mean to belittle the underlying urge, tdcracker, or come off as antagonistic to it. Trying to change society for the better is a noble goal. Just notin, as seems to have become clear to many on both sides, that the urge got twisted n taken up by the wrong type. Like, say, Ingrid fucking Newkirk.

Oh, n mikey-
You might as well argue with a Trekkie that their fan fiction is incoherent. It’s their world, and bringing reality into the discussion is like telling them Star Wars is better than Trek (which it is). Twisty has created a world to live in, and pointing out that said world is only tenuously related to the shared experience most of us call reality is only going to make that person defensive.
N besides, what’s the point of arguing with someone who’s decided homophobia is a form of misogyny?

Yeah, I’m getting that, db. I guess the thing that lights me up is the whole X Always is Y construct. Let’s face it, that is the fundamental basis for bigotry. Black people are __________ . Native Americans are __________ . Liberal Dudes are _______________ . And it’s weird that their cult of victimization is based upon railing against people who oppress women by saying some variation on All women are __________ .

Plus, to take the position that liberal men and conservative men equally oppress women is to say that no progress has been made, indeed, no progress CAN be made, so we will always be stuck right here where we are. History teaches us this is false. It strikes me as a coward’s excuse not to do the hard work to make things better. As we learn from the wingnuts, it is always easier to hate, to exhort to war than to live in peace. But it’s sad, ’cause except for the batshit part, we believe in the same things…

mikey

Jillian, where does Twisty say that she thinks that “all men are sexist and all white people are racist?” Really, I’m not seeing it.

Hey diffbrad, I also read and largely rejected the article FSA linked to, primarily owing to its unethical and illogical arguments. Positing that the only options for referring to females are “women” or “bitches” (and implying that without being forced to use the word “women,” men would be screaming “hey, bitch!” at every female in sight in an uncontrolled and permanent eruption of sexism) is disingenuous, as is the author’s assertion that the only options for references to herself are “Asian American” or “chink.”

Setting aside the ludicrousness of that false dichotomy for a moment, my gut-level problem with this variety of PC is that it’s woefully imprecise and often inaccurate: why would, say, a Canadian of Chinese ethnicity want to be called an Anything-American? Why assume that one is actually American based on, what, her fluency in English (insert appropriate joke here)? And why do the PCers insist that “Asian” refers to people of a certain portion of Asia but not the majority of the continent? Why is that family of Kazakhs living in Cincinnatti not “Asian-American”?

And then there’s the imprecision: who decided it was somehow an insult to refer to a person who is actually from Mexico as a Mexican? In PC world, this person must be “Hispanic.” We must be generic to the point of meaninglessness because somehow specificity has become offensive. (Sidebar: yes, we can still be precise about European ethnicity or origin — it’s OK to refer to Italians, Germans, Swedes and Danes as such — but as for people originating from those other continents, well, it would be offensive to specifically articulate that they’re Cambodian or Senegalese or Honduran, wouldn’t it? They have to be Asian, African or Hispanic — preferably with a hyphen in there somewhere).

Here’s how silly it has become: In my local supermarket, the aisle of goods that used to be labeled “Mexican foods” is now impossibly called “Hispanic ingredients” (I shit you not).

I mean, putting the “Men Hate You” category to one side and all.

It reminds me, mikey, of a class I took about racial theory, primarily Said and the idea of the Other, where I was the only guy, and a well off white guy at that. It was a downright stereotypical experience, to the point I don’t want to make too much of it except as a chuckle. The prof and the only non-white girl in the class were the only ones who actually listened to me, the rest, who were well educated white women living in lofts in manhattan, or brooklyn, just heard whatever I said as defending or justifying the patriarchy. Mostly I was trying to say that some of the white guys were just idiots, not malicious villains.
And some of us have learned to be less idiotic. That doesn’t make us saints, but the attitude of moral purity this twisty person displays is just so fucking full of it, not to mention repulsive. I tried reading the precious little FAQ, and it’s basically saying fuck you if you don’t agree with me. It’s not feminism there, it’s narcissism.

In the original thread over at IBTP where I had the audacity to go over and say “waitaminute, I’m a liberal dude and I’m not like that” there this one idiot who says “my goodness, twisty, I don’t know how you can keep your temper…”

Huh? You can’t keep your temper when someone disagrees with you? Talk about wingnuttian. Do you get your conversational skills from little green footballs, fer crissakes?

mikey

Jillian, where does Twisty say that she thinks that “all men are sexist and all white people are racist?� Really, I’m not seeing it.

FSA, it’s in the comments to a recent post of hers that links directly back to here. I’m currently operating on a policy of “not feeding the flames” by linking directly to anything currently under discussion, so I’ll leave it up to your not-unappreciable internet skills (no snark; compliment) to find what I’m talking about.

That’s pretty much a non-starter with me. But it’s a big planet and there’s room for all of us.

Mikey, I wouldn’t read too much into the words of your tormenters over there. They had the gear stuck in taunt ‘n’ goad.

Like that little intro she wrote for your opening comment–I mean, honestly, shit like that’s so outta bounds. Not like you need my support, but I was truly stunned by that thread (Hey, norbizness? Maybe a disclaimer for certain links, like “don’t click if you’re easily agitated and your cat just died”). I don’t think I’ve ever come across a group of commenters so uniformly horrid, and I’ve gotten into fights at Patterico’s joint.

I was actually a fan of IBTB for a couple of weeks, but then I realized she wasn’t being tongue-in-cheek.

(Yeah, it’s a dead horse we’re beating, but–and I can only speak for myself–after six years of the pod-people junta, it’s kinda refreshing to hate on people I can identify with)

Yeah, SM, the imprecision of the term PC is something even the linked post admits to, but doesn’t really answer. Not tolerating implicit bigotry or continued use of loaded language in mass media, or sometimes in conversation, is one, good, thing, setting speech codes and trying to hide particularities is another, stupid, thing. People have differences. But we’re still people. I don’t get it.

I too thought IBTP was tongue-in-cheek at first. It really isn’t, any more than “Rape Only Hurts if You Fight It” was tongue-in-cheek. Humor used to deliver a message the authors largely agree with.

Adding comments to the top of someone’s post is just childish and dishonest, especially when those comments are going to bias all the readers and are a very poor summary of the post itself.

It is also kind of disturbing that Twisty doesn’t think her readers can think for themselves so she has to explicitly tell them what their reaction is supposed to be.

The FAQ is funny, especially the “Are you just a white college dude making a parody website?” When you need to include that in your FAQ you know you are in trouble!

The whole thing is just obvious ego-gratification.

Oh, man.
I just noticed the post at feministe using my attempt to razz them as a closer.
Oy vey.
It’s funny, but it’s sad. If you can’t laugh at yourself just a tiny bit, you’re fucked.
I honestly feel a little sorry for that crowd now.

Which ain’t to say I was some kinda comic genius, but sheeit.
Anyways, shit, sorry, i don’t mean to fan flames i apparently did more than i realize to fan, but they closed that thread so an asshole like me gotta say summin somewhere.

Also phrasing like “the white dudes are …” or “the men are …” or “the gays are…” should annoy anyone. That is the phrasing used by the right wing to demonize people, and before them by Nazi Germany. (I’ll accept “the conservative” or “the liberals” to some degree since those are positions taken, not states of being.)

What annoys me about this PC talk, which I posted in a recent Feministe thread, is that the people making the argument have no self-awareness. It comes down to “what I say is ok, what you say is bad.”

It’s ok to talk about the white liberal dudes, or to say stupid things like racism is just a form of sexism (so shut up blackie, your problems are just a subset of ours!!), or to rail on the Duke Lacrosse players and anyone that merely identifies with them, but it isn’t ok to call someone a cunt. Self-serving logic.

I don’t like using the word cunt, I dont’ call people trannies, and I am down with the message that we should treat people respectfully. What I’m not down with is “*you* should treat people respectfully – I’ll still say whatever I feel like.”

Not a convincing argument if you ask me.

Whoo, I just made my first visit to IBTP, and I got outa there pretty quick. It was the citation of Andrea Dworkin that did it for me: there are many feminist writers saying sensible things, but alas that Andrea is (or rather was) not one of them. She was one of the most appallingly misandrogyst people in the history of the universe, I think. Scary.

So kudos on your bravery, mikey. Twisty ain’t gonna be hearing from me, because I’m a complete pussy.

A different brad, that was an interesting and thought-provoking comment, which would have provoked a thoughtful comment in response, except that I’m reading this on a Sunday morning and haven’t even had breakfast yet, so my brain hasn’t been woken or fed. Sorry. But nice stuff.

Apropos of the sexist language thing, my take has actually changed a tad recently, due to my reading Douglas Hofstadter’s excellent Purity in Language satirical article. I’d always thought that, fair enough, some sexist language should be changed, because it’s clearly and unnecessarily degrading, but I thought that the feminist extremists were going too far with some complaints. Now I’m not so sure: Hofstadter’s piece is a difficult read but a worthy one, and makes a complex point very well. As you’d expect from the man who wrote “Godel, Escher, Bach”, of course (which I haven’t read, I’m just citing in case you’ll think I have and therefore think I’m a clever trousers).

The short topic-relevant comment: any complaint or claim that starts, or implies “All X are Y” is a total load of bollocks. Except that one, obviously.

Thank you. Now it’s tuna time.

Anne Laurie, I hope you won’t mind me quoting from a felicitous comment you posted over at Alicublog:

My late father called it the “You People” Barrier. As he explained it to his offspring, a newcomer to the bar can often get away with calling a third party a stupid fuckwad. The newcomer might even get away with calling his new drinking friend a stupid fuckwad. But once the newcomer starts a sentence with “Why is it that you people are always such stupid fuckwads about… ” or “The trouble with you (stupid fuckwad) people is… ” the YPB has been breached. Punches will be thrown, scarring (psychic if not physical) will result, and there will be a bill for breakages that will severely deplete the regulars’ beer money.

I should have added the qualification I put in my reply to SM to my original comment, your royal feline highness. Some of what’s called PC is undeniably a worthwhile effort, some I think is at best misguided. Focusing on specific words can leave the values underlying those words untouched or even strengthened. And it can lead to moronic “circular firing squads” where the more righteous lead purity purges against those who agree with them in basic principle but not about exactly which words are bad.
No words are bad. Intents are bad. Context is everything.

N now i’m getting back into the previously established, “well, duh” territory.
Which is fine with me.
That IBTP place is effed up but good. Jarringly so.
We, I, should shut up about it before a wingnut finds it n uses it against us.

Just let it go, guys.

Take a deep breath, and remind yourself that it’s a big planet, and there’s room for all of us in it somewhere. There’s room for women who want to hate on men (not many), men who want to hate on women (a bunch more of those), and people who are vastly disheartened by all the hating in general (most of us).

Don’t listen to Jillian, she doesn’t even know what ‘ERA’ in baseball is! She isn’t one of us!!!

It’s good to proofread and check one’s facts before going off on a rant. I wrote this huge long post, feeling sad and upset because I was actually disagreeing with Mortician, one of my favorite posters ever, because I thought he was saying that it was okay to call all Latino/Hispanic people Mexicans. I finished it, proofed it – well, as well as can be done without teh preview button – and then, I stopped and thought about it, and read Mortician’s post again…and lo and behold, he wasn’t saying that at all. He said it was stupid to say it isn’t okay to call a person from Mexico a Mexican, which is perfectly true. Sheesh.

And I haven’t even had a drink yet, although, irony not being dead, I will soon be going to a Mexican restaurant to eat lovely food and drink lovely beer.

I stayed out of the Feministe debate. I will say this: both sides had points, most of the people on both sides were pretty civil at first, and then some people from both sides were kinda, well, jerks. ‘Nuff said. Let it go! Please. I guess what FSA said is what I mean.

It was actually kind of funny: I’d read a post, and say, yeah, that’s true, then read the rebuttal and do the same thing. It gave me a headache and I had to lie down. I hope you’re all happy, and you, too, Feministe!

Oh! And as a lifelong redhead, I deman we purge the party of the ‘alleged’ writer of that ridiculous article. Purge the party! Or, in the best Roman tradition, Party and Purge! 🙂

Or, in the best Roman tradition, Party and Purge!

With lead utensils!

Jillian, as usual, you bring wisdom. What makes this unusual to me, and therefore subject to discussion, is simply this. I have been doing this blog thing for about a year. I see a link, I might well go over someplace and see what they have to say. And if it makes me think, I might well drop a comment, for or against on my way out the door. That’s all I did when I followed the link to IBTP. They said something I felt needed addressing, they have comments, I just thought it would be ok to give them my thoughts. What could be wrong with that? And yet, they responded like, in my experience, only right-wing war monger sites respond to me.

My experience in left blogistan has been fairly benign. But to be collectively savaged by people with whom I am in 90% agreement was a shock to me. A shocking shock. I’ve been able to take pride, over the years, in my support for women’s issues. And these fuckers, who don’t know anything about me, are ready to denigrate me and my beliefs, when my beliefs are IN THEIR FAVOR!!

It was quite a surprise, a learning process, and something I’m still trying to process. Please bear with me…

mikey

Well, mikey, as little as as it’s my place to try n act more experienced than you in anything whatsoever, I think the best way to respond is to remember that some people will always take things too far. I think the site is supposed to be in a certain way funny, in a blowing off steam kinda way, and they’re trying to say you shouldn’t come there because they’re going to tear any guy who comes in asking for any degree of respect to shreds in a cathartic rite, so guys who come by should remember their place and be subservient. It’s, like, cleverly ironic.
But it’s not funny, because, as I think Random Observer said, but I might be wrong, there’s no self-awareness, at least not in the portions of it I read. No wink from almost any there to acknowledge their own humanity, and that none of us are mother fucking theresa.
I agree with the wingnutty associations, but I think it’s more of a wingnut attempt at humor it reminds me of. It makes me wonder if It’d even be apparent from reading it that a transcript of, say, julian gorin doing stand up was meant to be comedic.
I don’t really know or care, but it’s proving sufficient distraction from the work I should be doing on a saturday night like the nerd i am.

Although I’m not sure it’d be funny even with a wink. Thinly veiled hate doesn’t make most people chuckle, thankfully. Or maybe I’m fooling myself.

Mikey, when I read your post on IBTP is looked reasonable, but I think a lot of people interpreted it as something like:

“I’m not going to support your cause any more because of the things you say.”

What I read was “alienating people who would otherwise support you is a bad thing” but I think a lot of people took it as a threat rather than an observation.

There is a kneejerk reaction to categorize and dismiss people who don’t agree with you, most people do that to some degree. That’s what you ran into and your phrasing was not the greatest.

Sorry to be a dick, but it really is kind of adorable that you guys got yelled at by feminists and now you’re hurt and confused and you need to talk about your feelings.

Not dissing you–hell, I wasn’t there and I only read the actual transcripts two days ago and I STILL got upset–but c’mon, it’s cute.

“Hurt and confused” is not correct.

It is just frustrating to not be able to communicate at all with people you ostensibly agree with on most issues.

Also there wasn’t enough condescension in your comment, please rephrase.

is there room on the planet for fat people?

Dude, I was on your side before you even joined in–scroll up and see–but I do apologize if you seriously think I was trying to bust on you or call you a wuss or whatever.

Maybe I should cut a hole in my cheek so that everyone can see the precise location of my tongue. I meant it as a compliment, albeit one bundled with a needling–lesser men would’ve just stomped off in a misogynist-epithet muttering rage, instead of engaging in a big long post-hostilities assessment like this.

Okay, now for that second helping of condescension as per your request, although this one, like the first, comes from a place of respect and affection rather than dismissiveness,and darned if disclaimers don’t torpedo the whole point of tweaking people:

So are we cool, or is this the end of our Robert Bly book club?

The handmaiden has asked me to relay the message that she hasn’t been feeling especially well lately, which is why she missed so much of the dust-up with Feministe and with IBTP.

When she did, finally, feel up to reading through all the Sturm und drang, it made her so ill she had to go back to bed for a while. She was muttering stuff about ‘basics of radical feminist theory,’ and ‘doing one’s reading,’ and ‘need to agree on the terms of the discussion first.’

I didn’t pay much attention, a) because she was feverish, and b) frankly, when she talks like that she’s dead boring and not amusing at all.

I like it when she’s sick in bed, because she doesn’t move around so much, and I can sleep on her more comfortably. When she’s up and about, typing and having a life and stuff, I keep getting bounced out of her lap or off of her shoulder. Which sucks.

So, thank you all so much for making the handmaiden take to her bed!

Perhaps you can do it all again? Soon? Because that would totally RAWK!

Sure, it stinks for her, but as long as she can drag herself out of bed long enough to fill the food bowls and tend to the litter pans, who cares?

Thenkyew,

GBC

Welcome back Ganesh Bengal Cat… I was surprised and a bit concerned by the absence of any lewd cat-related contributions during the recent fracas. But if you are occupied keeping the handmaiden warm, then I understand. Hope she feels better soon.

The book club can continue.

I’m just a simple gray stripey cat, from the streets, but my people saved me from… well, something, I’ve never been exactly clear what.

But I bring them small dead creatures occasionally, and they give me crunchies, and let me out to frolic with the neighbor cats.

They’ve all got big warm laps. If not for the slobbery dog, life would be great. She’s not that bad, but she takes attention that should obviously be mine.

But hey! There’s some hot babes around here!

Not that I know anything about doing anything with hot babes, ever since that one doctor visit, but I still like ’em! How ya doin’!

Howzabout we meet up round the big dumpster down by the Thai restaurant, and do some yowling? Wattaya say?

mikey, it was your long hair.

Obviously.

Thing is, Shannon is way cuter.