As a general rule, I try not to discuss people in these Lexicon entries for a couple of reasons. First, I’d rather discuss ideas than people. And second, all it takes is one scumbag lawyer representing a Leftist freak for your humble correspondent to be in court over their hurt fee-fees.
This week, I have to make an exception, but it’s not for these reasons. The Left has their collectivist hivemind set on a Presidential aide with the Trump Administration, Natalie Harp. Apparently, those who believe in strong intelligent women don’t think Ms. Harp can be a strong intelligent woman serving under the President and must have another reason for being there.
Yeah. They went there.
So, in my defense (and Ms. Harp’s), I have to go there to discuss the underpinnings of the Left’s hypocrisy. Get your hip-waders on. We’re gonna get muddy!
Natalie Harp
What the Left thinks it means – a woman who is serving the President, if you know what I mean
What it really means – A Presidential aide. That’s it.
When looking at Ms. Harp’s history, there isn’t much there that stands out as out of place. Her rise to more administrative power could be rewritten for any political operative, right down to the academic bona fides. So, why all of the sudden have Leftists become Harp enthusiasts?
Donald Trump.
I’m the first one to admit Trump has done himself no favors with his sexual history, both real and made up of utter bullshit. (By the way, Tom Arnold, we’re still waiting on your proof of Trump’s “piss tape.” I’m sure you could spare some time in your current schedule of doing jack shit to produce that evidence.) But, as we’ve seen from the Left’s defense of Bill “Commander In Briefs” Clinton, the sexual side of politics doesn’t matter as long as you support the right things.
You know, like journalists offering to give Bubba “mouth hugs” because of his support of abortion rights.
Of course, Trump doesn’t get that glazing (#phrasing) from the Left because he’s literally Hitler! Seriously, it’s because he’s a Republican. As Matt Gaetz can tell you, the Left will do anything they can do to insinuate sexual impropriety against Republicans when the facts may or may not be there.
Guess what they’re doing now, kids.
Ms. Harp’s proximity to Trump makes her a prime target to use as a cudgel against the President because as we all know all Republican or right-leaning woman is a mindless MAGA fembot without agency. (For y0u Leftists reading this, that was sarcasm.) Then again, these same Leftists think Dylan “Temu Ariana Grande” Mulvaney is a strong and brave woman, so do with that what you will.
One of the criticisms the Left has levied against Trump is he surrounds himself with a “type,” namely attractive blonde women. And Ms. Harp certainly fits the bill. Naturally, the Left latched onto that to fabricate fanfic stories less believable than the results of a California election under Governor Gavin Newsom.
This is one of the most amusing parts of this pseudo-scandal for me. On the one hand, the Left acts like giggling little kids because of the sexual innuendoes involved. At the same time, they’re acting like the moralizing scolds from the Religious Right from the 1980s (all while hiding their own sexual skeletons). It’s Schrödinger’s Sex Scandal: it’s both good and bad the President is accused of sexual impropriety, and it depends on how one perceives it.
Appropriately enough, both this concept and the original form of it involve pussy.
When sex and politics come together (#phrasingagain), you’re going to find weirdos emerging from the woodwork to weave a story. And some of those weirdos hold public office.
May I introduce Senator Jon “Lying My” Ossoff. He kicked off a firestorm over Ms. Harp when he made the following statement during a campaign stop:
He doesn’t want to do the job. He wants to build his ballroom and travel with Natalie on their apparently defenseless flying palace gifted by the Emir of Qatar.
There’s a few things to unpack here, but the main point is the suggestion President Trump and Ms. Harp are fucking. Slight innuendo perhaps, but it’s there. He later tried to explain away the comment and then doubled down on it. (Schrödinger’s Denial perhaps?)
By the way, if any members of the Schrödinger estate want to kick me a few bucks for promoting your late relative, I’m okay with that.
But it’s not just Leftist politicians getting into the act. Leftist media types (but I repeat myself) are also getting into the fray. Here are just a few snippets from our favorite presstitutes.
Natalie is essentially a body person. She is a human binkie. Somebody who loves him as much as his wife. He would say to aides she’s never going to leave me. – Maggie Haberman, New York Times
None of these people defending Trump’s side piece seemed to have any issue with Trump calling female reporters “piggy” and “hag.” – Julie Brown, Miami Herald
Meet Natalie Harp, the aide so close to Trump she once rode in an SUV trunk to accompany him “As the motorcade idled outside his Trump Tower residence, staffers confronted a more immediate problem: There wasn’t room for Harp, the hyper-loyal aide whose devotion to Trump had quickly entrenched her within his orbit. A screaming match in the lobby ensued, with Harp insisting that Trump had personally asked her to attend the court appearance, two sources familiar with the matter told CNN. Denied a seat but determined not to be left behind, Harp jumped into an SUV trunk, according to the two sources and confirmed by a photo obtained by CNN.” W @adamcancryn – Kristen Holmes, CNN
Salary of executive assistant Natalie Harp: $150,000 a year.
Average salary of a sailor on the USS Lincoln:
~ $50,000 a year. – X post from Bill Kristol
Trump’s Human Printer Is Cray-Cray – title of article on The Bullwark by Jonathan V. Last
“Man, I wish Trump were just having an affair with someone forty-five years his junior. That kind of relationship would make sense. It would be gross, but intelligible. The reality of the Trump–Harp…thing…is so bonkers that I don’t have words for it.” – X post from Bill Kristol, quoting from the aforementioned Bullwark article
Erin’s full interview with the estranged brother of Trump aide Natalie Harp as CNN reports Harp is constantly around Trump all hours of the day: “It really blows my mind.” – X post from Erin Burnett OutFront, CNN
And speaking of Ms. Burnett, she had an interview with Ms. Harp’s estranged brother on her show. Because when you want to get to the heart of who someone is, you gotta talk to a relative you don’t get along with. That’s Journalism 101.
And for any Leftists reading this, that was also sarcasm.
Although going into public service means you have to give up your privacy, what Ms. Harp is experiencing right now is beyond the fucking pale and only because of her political leanings. Of course, the Left doesn’t care about the privacy of women who don’t agree with them, or anything else about women who don’t agree with them for that matter. Yes, dear readers, the self-professed “Party of Women” doesn’t see anyone outside of its hugbox as human worthy of even the most basic of human respect. And I can prove it in one word.
COVID.
The kind of utter disdain the Left has for non-Leftists was hard to overlook and even harder to endure. Throw in the Left’s lawfare against Trump (including the aforementioned lies about him), the capriciousness of the January 6th detainees, the frequent death threats against Trump and other Republicans, the joy they had at Charlie Kirk’s assassination, the list goes on and on.
But if you don’t use the proper pronouns, you’re the monster.
That’s the area we’re heading in right now with Michelle Harp. She isn’t a woman in the eyes of the Left; she’s a tool to be used against President Trump, and that’s all she’ll ever be to them. No intelligence, no agency, not even an entity deserving of respect. Just a weapon, a tool used by tools if you will. Even if you won’t, I’m sticking with it because it’s my blog, dammit!
Either way, I hope she gets through this media-fueled rough patch with humor, grace, and determination to keep doing her job to the best of her ability. Success is the best revenge you can get on people on the Left.
And since they’re not familiar with it, it will come as a complete surprise, which makes it all the funnier!
Tag: misogyny
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
I’ve often said the Left loves to control the narrative through control of the English language. So much of our modern vernacular comes from the Left’s lexicon (if you’ll pardon the expression, and even if you don’t, I’m using it anyway), such as “woke,” “political correctness,” and “Joe Biden is sharp as a tack.” And when there isn’t a word that describes what they want, they invent one.
I ran across one of these new words recently. As with most things these days, it started with a message on the Social Media Platform Formerly Known As Twitter by James Woods about sitting Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson. As you might expect, Leftists didn’t take too kindly to his take on the Justice’s intellectual prowess or lack thereof, but it wasn’t until one poster used the term “misogynoir” that I paid attention because once you’ve heard one Leftist bitching about something, you’ve heard their laundry list of offenses, real or imagined. Even so, this was a new one to me, so I decided to jump down this rabbit hole for this week’s Lexicon entry.
misogynoir
What the Left thinks it means – the intersection of racism and sexism
What it really means – a new term for old bullshit
Misogynoir isn’t exactly a new term, but it has its roots in more modern history. The term was coined by black feminist Moya Bailey in 2008 to describe hatred aimed at black cisgender and trans women and is steeped in the wonderful world of intersectionality. For those of you playing along at home, intersectionality is the idea that all oppression is connected. Think of it like one long human centipede, but with weirder hair color.
This allows for people of all walks of life (except for straight white men) to claim multiple systems of oppression at the same time. Conversely, it also creates an environment where you’re playing Pokemon: Oppression. Gotta catch ’em all! The more systems oppress you, the more of a victim you become and, thus, the higher your stature is within the Left.
Which is kinda sick when you think about it, and I do because my bank account is lower than the insole of a millipede with fallen arches.
Regardless, there is one thing about victimhood that often gets overlooked in the race to see who can be the most victimized: victimhood doesn’t define you unless you let it. The Left doesn’t see it that way; they only see the victim as a helpless soul that only they can “save” by…let me check my notes here…oh, yeah, enabling them.
Yes, the same people who say trans women can get pregnant are the ones saying it’s okay for you to be a victim, to feel all the fee-fees connected to it, and, above all else, vote for Leftists so you can continue to be a victim and get paid for it by the government. After all, it’s not your fault you were born the way you are! This was put upon you by The Man, and as long as you survive, you are the living embodiment of the double bird directed towards The Man.
Say what you will about the Left, and believe me I do, but they have the ability to get people to feel oppressed at everyday shit down to a science. I guess that makes them the Party of Science…
I’ll see myself out.
Anyway, I’m gobsmacked by how many otherwise semi-normal people are willing to take up the burden of others and make it their own, even if/when the most oppression they’ve actually faced was having a Starbucks barista charge for an extra shot of coffee in their steamed milk. And the ones who seem to feel the most guilt? Leftist white women.
It’s that reason that misogynoir is even a thing.
Leftists of color know they can get whites to capitulate to whatever bullshit they can imagine because they prey on guilt. And the more victimhood they can pile on, the guiltier white Leftists feel. Pretty good work (and I mean that in the professional wrestling sense) if you can get it.
But does it actually fix anything? Not really. Much like putting a Hello Kitty bandage on a gaping chest wound, it’s not helpful and actually counterproductive. Of course, if you put some Bactine on the wound…yeah, still not helpful.
When you start oppression stacking without attempting to get to the core of why you feel oppressed, you never make progress, which is ironic considering how many Leftists call themselves “progressives.” This is by design because once you do an honest assessment of your oppression it puts things into perspective. Those who experience real trauma spend years processing it in an attempt to overcome it. But those who perceive trauma never take those steps because it would expose how little actual trauma they’ve experienced, thus it ruins their victim status.
I don’t know what Ms. Bailey experienced, so I can’t and won’t paint her as someone in the latter category. There are still racist and sexist assholes out there, and it’s entirely possible, if no probable, the Venn Diagram of both groups come pretty close to a single circle. Having said that, the idea of misogynoir seems to be pretty rare in the real world, where women of color are held in high regard for their accomplishments. And those who aren’t find themselves in Congress.
What Mr. Woods posted doesn’t mention Justice Brown Jackson’s race or gender, just her intellectual prowess or lack thereof. In order to make the statement misogynoirist, one has to insert those subtexts and fixate on them rather than the substance of the statement.
And those who are happy to do so have a problem on their hands, namely the statements of another Supreme Court Justice, Sonia Sotomayor. The “Wise Latina” herself wrote an concurring opinion on a matter before the High Court that called out Justice Brown Jackson for addressing matters that were not involved in the case before them.
So…is Justice Sotomayor misogynoiristic? She is a woman of color, so that would negate both sides of the misogynoir equation. Not to mention, she’s right about Justice Brown Jackson.
As is James Woods.
The difference is when Woods makes the statement, he’s painted as misogynoiristic regardless of the merits of said statement. When Sotomayor makes the statement, the Left gets reaaaaaaaally quiet. But we’re not supposed to notice that, kids. We’re only supposed to believe Woods is the racist and sexist here, which is the whole point. The Left doesn’t want to admit Justice Brown Jackson has been a bit of a lightweight on legal issues in spite of her bona fides (as Leftists have and will tout as a defense of her inane decisions), which has caused more than a little friction with her ideological allies on the High Court, both with the substance and the style of her decisions.
But I’m sure they’re just racist and sexist, amirite?
While I’m sure there are legitimate examples of misogynoir out there, this ain’t it, kids. The Left throws out labels as a way to defend those they see as victims to divert attention away from any substantive debate. Calling out a Supreme Court Justice for bizarre legal arguments and those alone is fair game and should be done. Inserting intent, especially negative intent against the person making the comments, isn’t. But in the realm of Dungeons and Dragons…I mean Pokemon: Oppression, no quarter is given to protect the precious, even if it makes the Left look like hypocritical assholes.
Oh, and I’m waiting for the misogynoir crowd to condemn the racism hurled at Justice Clarence Thomas by their side. If they do, I’ll be in my cryogenic chamber.
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
Remember the good old days when men were men, women were women, and nobody used science to prove otherwise? Well, as anyone who can lived through COVID-19 and is being honest about it can tell you, science has gotten a lot more political and a lot less like science.
Amid all the major stories over the past week (apparently a former President got indicted on the “buy one grand jury, get another one free” program), there was one that caught my eye because of its ties to one of the major controversies of the day. This comes from Johns Hopkins University, or more specifically their Diversity and Inclusion branch. In a recently-found glossary of terms, women aren’t women anymore; they’re, and I’m not making this up, “non-men.”
Welcome to the era of female erasure. And welcome to this week’s Lexicon entry!
female erasure
What the Left thinks it means – an overblown and unfounded reaction to recognizing trans women as real women
What it really means – another example of Leftist misogyny, this time disguised as support for trans rights
For the purposes of full disclosure, I am a man. In a lot of people’s minds, that automatically invalidates my opinions on women’s issues and opens me up to criticisms of “manplaining.” Well, half of my chromosomes came from a woman, so at the very least half of my opinions are worth considering. Plus, I’m so in touch with my feminine side, I’m suing myself for sexual harassment.
Having said all that, I recognize the importance women have on human history and the strides they’ve made to be seen as equals to men by at least a majority of Americans. And for a lot of years, Leftists seemed on board with that, and for the purposes of fundraising and politics, they still are. And since women make up over half of Americans as of 2021, that’s a pretty good reason not to piss them off.
Enter trans right activists. Within the past couple of years, they’ve advanced the idea that men who transition into women are actual women and anyone who says differently (i.e. someone who stayed awake in biology class) is a bigot who hates trans people. And with that, women became a subjective term instead of a scientifically established certainty that even kindergarteners could explain.
And for those who are wondering? Still two genders. I’ll break in with updates as warranted.
Meanwhile back at the main point, Leftists have found a way to both court and offend women by insisting a man who says he’s a woman is no different than a woman who has been a woman all her life. Aside from the biological differences, I can attest from being married to a woman for 10 years now men and women do not have the same experiences. Contrary to what trans women tell you, they don’t get periods or menstrual cramps, which means they don’t know what it’s like to go through it for the first time and all the emotional and hormonal elements that come along with it. To suggest otherwise is like an Amy Schumer joke: stolen. Oh, and bad.
For proof of this, we can look no further than the poster child of modern trans women, Dylan Mulvaney. Due to a year-long publicity stunt called “365 Days of Girlhood”, Mulvaney got a lot of positive attention, which given his past antics to gain attention, is exactly what he/she wanted. Content Warning: do not watch these videos if you’re easily offended by over-the-top acting, easily influenced by social media, or generally skeeved out by Dylan.
At this point, I have to clarify something. Although Mulvaney goes by she/her pronouns, I don’t think she/her is actually trans. Case in point: “normalize the bulge.” Women can have bulges, just not where their dicks would be if they had them in the first place. And as of this writing, Mulvaney has yet to fully transition, which means his normalized bulge is still a dick and balls. Hence, I use his/her and him/her to describe the insanity that is Dylan Mulvaney.
If Mulvaney were the only person doing this, we could write it off as an anomaly. (Come to think of it, we still can, but that’s beside the point.) Unfortunately for women, he/she isn’t. Trans women are finding new footholds in women’s spaces, ranging from competitive sports to combat sports, even to beauty salons catering to women’s genital waxing and to changing rooms. At this point, it’s no longer about acceptance. Trans women are trying to insert themselves (if you’ll pardon the double entendre) into spaces reserved for biological women and expecting women to knuckle under.
You know, just like abusive men?
This is another fundamental difference between men and women that the trans community doesn’t want us to know: men are more aggressive than women generally. Granted, you aren’t likely to get throttled to a pulp by a Leftist man in skinny jeans and a man bun, but the potential is still there. Combine this with the differences in musculature between the genders (checking…still 2), and you have an individual who has the tools and the mentality to physically assault women. And Leftists want these folks to be in the presence of their potential victims because reasons?
Maybe Ben Shapiro has opinions on this.
And make no mistake, it’s trans women (i.e. men) who are forcing the issue with the help of their Leftist enablers. With each trans woman who enters the female space, a little bit of the female experience gets erased and replaced with someone who has yet to truly experience it. In other words, the Left is replacing women with biological men and showing favoritism towards the latter.
Say, isn’t there a term for something like that? Mis…something or other? I’m sure some Leftist will fill in the blanks for me.
To add more sodium chloride to the wound, Leftists deny any of this is going on, in spite of Leftist women calling it out. And how do many Leftists respond? By calling them Nazis. In fact, any woman who doesn’t agree with biological men taking over women’s spots gets treated the same way. Just ask J. K. Rowling, who has been the epitome of evil for Leftists because she…dared to say trans women weren’t actually women. And who has been consistent in not backing down to the trans mob?
J. K. Fucking Rowling.
Although it’s disheartening to see how few women are standing up to the Left in their attempts to slowly eliminate female accomplishments, I see that tide turning. With more women of all political stripes speaking up, it gets harder for Leftists to discount female erasure. Oh, they will, make no mistake. But you can only call someone a Nazi so many times before he or she tells you to go fuck yourself.
But don’t fret, trans women. Most of you have the equipment to do just that.
And this just in…still two genders!