As a recovering Leftist, I fully admit I used to believe some weird, illogical shit in my youth. Back then it was easy because a) Leftists knew just what to say to get me to believe them, and b) I was a dumbass. But the shit the Left wants us to accept as fact is well beyond anything I believed in my youth.
And for once I’m not talking about one of Queen Kamala the Appointed’s speeches. However, I’m starting to think there’s something in the Left’s water supply that is making their beliefs even more bizarre than usual. The latest example came from House Delegate from the Virgin Islands, Stacey Plaskett. During a hearing regarding the weaponization of the Department of Justice and the FBI against political opponents (read: anyone to the right of Karl Marx), Ms. Plaskett uttered the following:
…so that those agencies [the DOJ and FBI] are no longer there to serve as a check against white nationalism, great replacement theorists, Christian nationalists, white fragility, fascists, and the twice impeached convicted felon, former president and would-be dictator Donald Trump.
Her full insane rant…I mean statement wasn’t much better at sticking to reality. But she did mention one thing worth discussion, that being white fragility. This term has been thrown around a lot in recent years, mainly by racists and their supporters, to mock white people for getting offended or upset about things. So, as a Honkey-American, I wanted to take a closer look at white fragility to see what it was.
white fragility
What the Left thinks it means – the negative reactions whites feel when non-whites discuss racism
What it really means – a made-up term designed to make whites feel more guilty than they should on racial matters
The term white fragility was coined by Dr. Robin DiAngelo who focuses on, get this, whiteness studies and critical discourse analysis. When she’s not allegedly copying off black scholars and passing their work off as her own or being made to look like an idiot by Matt Walsh, she’s turned a bullshit specialization into a cash cow. She’s written a book on the subject, became the Left’s favorite anti-white honkey, and is being taken seriously by people like Stacey Plaskett.
And, no, that’s not a compliment, ma’am.
The idea behind white fragility is simple: white people feel guilty, angry, etc., when people not like them talk about racism, which is (surprise surprise)…racist, according to Dr. DiAngelo. So, if you’re confused by the logic, and believe me I get it, if a white person tries to speak about racism in a group of non-whites, it’s white privilege. If that same person doesn’t speak about racism in a group of non-whites, it’s white fragility and racist.
That kind of thinking makes the Kobayashi Maru look like a Connect the Dots puzzle with only one dot.
The thing about white fragility is it derives from Leftist squawking points on race. You know, the sentiments whites are the root of all evil and can only redeem themselves by actively fighting racism at every turn as dictated by the Left? Yeah, that’s not gonna fly with anyone with two working brain cells to rub together.
Which means, it’s perfect for guilting white Leftists into becoming slaves.
Look, whites have been absolute assholes to minorities for a long time, and it’s important we recognize that so it doesn’t happen as widely as it once did. But where the Left goes off the rails is making it a permanent condition. They don’t want whites to acknowledge our history; they want us to be eternally burdened by it.
And now, we have some Congressional dipshit wanting the FBI and Department of Justice to combat it? Maybe it’s me, but I would think the federal government should want whites to get rid of its white fragility, not fight against it as the aforementioned dipshit says. But, that’s where my hypothesis of something being in the Left’s water supply makes a lot more sense.
More to the point, white fragility doesn’t take into account one major factor: most people don’t give a shit. After being barraged with “white people suck” day after day ad nauseum, there are a lot of whites who shut down and tune out that claptrap because they’re tired of it. Others, like your humble correspondent, aren’t concerned about race because…now get this…we treat each other like fellow human beings. In those cases, race doesn’t even enter the equation, so there’s nothing we feel we have to feel guilty about.
And that drives Leftists crazy…er. The Left is obsessed with anything that can be used to categorize and then separate us. After all, what better way to rule over people than to keep them at each other’s throats by suggesting the different parties are trying to screw over everyone else?
So, what happens when we decide not to be divided? Aside from the Left losing their shit, it shows we aren’t that far off as a country. There are few actual racists out there, mainly because America has evolved to reject racism. Yet, in order to get people to believe what the Left wants us to believe, they have to stoke any division they can.
Even if they have to invent it out of nothing. You know, like an academic focus on “whiteness.” Which reminds me of a line from the Oscar-snubbed cinematic classic “PCU”: You can major in GameBoy if you know how to bullshit.
Not surprisingly, white fragility is just another way for the Left to keep racism alive. The problem is it assumes only whites are fragile. Granted, if everyone you know is a white Leftist, that’s a safe assumption. The fact is Leftists are all fragile. It’s just a matter of what causes them to shatter.
The easiest way to do that is to deny their premise. Reject the notion of white fragility by pointing out the flaws in the notion, namely the fact the Left only sees white fragility while ignoring the fragility of other races. Case in point: Joy Ann Reid. She makes an emo kid look stable on a regular basis. To call her unhinged is assuming she was ever hinged to begin with, and that’s just a bridge too far for me.
When you really think about it (and I do because the Indiana Fever were swept in the WBNA Finals), the very concept that only whites can be fragile is the definition of racism. Remember, kids, racism isn’t just about someone believing one race is better than another. It’s also about someone believing one race is inferior.
But you don’t have to take my word for it. Our friends at Dictionary.com agree.
Pull that kind of intellectual judo on a Leftist and they lose their shit. And when it comes to white fragility, they deserve to lose their shit.
So, with no due respect Ms. Plaskett, white fragility is only a thing to the Left. The rest of us are just fine not talking about race because we don’t particularly care. Besides, college football is on and that’s a hell of a lot more entertaining than worrying about whether we’re meeting some Leftist’s expectations on talking about race.
Category: Social Issues
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
In my years of being a Leftist and covering them, there is one rock-solid, take-it-to-the-bank statement that not even the most honest Leftists can deny: Leftists say some really weird shit. And I’m not just talking about prolonged discussions on the virtues of Drag Queen Story Hours or the actual number of genders (still two, by the way). Even when I’m prepared for the weird shit, there are times when even I have to take a step back and admire the nuttier-than-squirrel-shit take.
Like this one from The Hill website, “Are the Democrats Now the Party of Reagan?” Although the premise is as absurd as the media allowing a major party candidate to go unquestioned for more than a few minutes, let alone weeks (good thing that never happens, amirite?), it did get me to thinking. Which lead me to writing this week’s Lexicon, since that’s kinda what I do around here.
the party of Reagan
What the Left thinks it means – a by-gone era that should stay in the past because it was so horrible, except when it can be used to attract voters
What it really means – a by-gone era that the Left still doesn’t understand
The 1980s were a decade of dayglo oddities. The old excesses of the late 70s continued (including the coke habits) while new technologies started to take hold. Celebrities rose and empires fell. And at the core of it all was Ronald Reagan.
Say what you will about the man, but Ronald Reagan was a generational President in both good and bad ways. His strength when dealing with the former Soviet Union, his economic policies, and his undying love of America held us in good stead during a time when America’s self-opinion was lower than a snake’s codpiece. Yet, the way he handled Iran/Contra, his mental decline in his later years, and some of the policy decisions he made with AIDS and apartheid in South Africa were less than awesome.
In short, Reagan was just like the rest of us. Only with more access to the nuclear arsenal.
The Left’s hatred of the Reagan era stemmed from their unrequited love of the former Soviet Union. After decades of appeasing the Soviets, Reagan became an aggressor because he realized what the super-smart Leftists (just ask them) didn’t: communism doesn’t work. At some point, the communists run out of other people’s money, which creates either massive deficit spending, a greater reliance on those who are already carrying the bulk of the weight, or a combination of the two.
There’s that economics degree Reagan earned coming into play.
Once the Soviet Union went the way of the Atari 2600 “E.T.” video game, the Left’s hatred of Reagan intensified. Sure, they had other legit and semi-legit criticisms as noted above, but he proved them wrong. Appeasing the Soviets only allowed them to continue stockpiling weapons, making plans to conquer the rest of the world, and putting out shitty products under the auspices of everyone being equal (except for the party leaders, of course). Leftists at the time swore up and down Reagan would lead us into World War III, create a nuclear holocaust, and destroy the planet.
You know, like Leftists said Donald Trump would do?
When that didn’t happen, Leftists couldn’t handle it. And since they were the ones writing the history books at the time, they did their best to control the narrative. Once the Berlin Wall fell, though, they couldn’t get it done with those who actually lived and paid attention during that time. So, Leftists decided to wait a generation or two to get their version of events to become the primary timeline.
Which brings us to the party of Reagan. As much as I would like to say today’s Republican Party is an offshoot of the Reagan years, I can’t. Both major parties shed their skins some time ago and evolved into parties that no longer resemble their namesakes. Democrats and Republicans are both fans of big government at times, but only when they’re running it. And they’re not afraid to use force to get what they want. Remember the COVID lockdowns? President Trump and President Brick Tamland didn’t deviate that much policywise. Of course, much of that can be laid the feet of Saint Anthony of Fauci’s fault, Patron Saint of Scientific Bullshit, but both Trump and Tamland were reading from the same script.
Furthermore, the Republican “leadership” is as flaky as a croissant at times. Sure, they talk a great game about fiscal responsibility and conservative values, but they will sell those out in the name of compromising with people who think they’re the most evil people on the planet. And it happens time after time after time.
And the Democrats? They’re selling out to the lunatic fringe at every opportunity. From the Green New Boondoggle to the anti-Israel sentiment from The Squad, the Left has gone so far left Karl Marx looks like Milton Friedman, both in ideology and in economic knowledge. Today’s Left is turning off a lot more people than they’re attracting, or at the very least they’re turning off enough Leftists with actual jobs and money. This makes for an interesting internal civil war for the soul of the Left, and hopefully an even more interesting blog post later.
Meanwhile, it amazes me anybody with two brain cells to rub together would think Democrats are now the party of Reagan. Then again, this is an opinion writer from The Hill, so your intellectual mileage may vary. The way the author makes it sound, Republicans have abandoned the principles Reagan laid out, which they have for the most part. But he fails to make the connection that Democrats have taken up the mantle. The best he comes up with is Democrats’ undying support for Ukraine (which reflects not only a lack of understanding of Reagan’s foreign policy , but a fundamental lack of understanding of just how fucked up Ukraine’s leadership is).
His case isn’t exactly bolstered by self-professed Reaganites like Bill Kristol, Adam Kinslinger, and Liz Cheney, whose conservative bonafides are more questionable than three day old convenience store sushi. Or a freshly-made meal at Chipotle, for that matter. While the aforementioned Republicans (and many more like them who will remain nameless to protect the innocent and the dumbasses) tout how much closer they are to Reagan than any of the current crop of Republicans, the fact is they’re closer to Regan from “The Exorcist” than Reagan himself.
So, if the Republicans aren’t the party of Reagan anymore and the Democrats never have been and never will be if the current crop of fuckups have any say in the matter, who is the party of Reagan today? Unfortunately, there is no party that has it even remotely right. Either the fiscal policies are out of whack or the social and military policies are off, so there’s no real safe haven for those of us who have a fond memory of what Reagan stood for. So, we’re stuck either holding our noses for candidates who Reagan wouldn’t even acknowledge as Republicans, voting for a third party because we can’t hold our nose enough to vote for Republicans, or writing in candidates like your humble correspondent.
By the way, SMOD 24, baby!
Maybe it’s time we should stop thinking in terms of Reagan as far as political leadership is concerned, but not in terms of the grassroots. Even if our elected officials don’t hold Reagan in high esteem, we still can. American pride, appreciation of hard work, a love of the free market, all these things and much more are still within our power to use in our lives.
Plus, it will piss off Leftists, so win-win, baby!
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
While Kamala Harris and Tim Walz continue their Happy Happy Joy Joy Tour, there is a term that has resurfaced unironically that I haven’t heard in a while: communism. And here I thought communism went the way of the Berlin Wall!
Anyway, Tim “Mirror Universe Dick Cheney” Walz described communism as it’s being forced…I mean practiced in China as, “It means that everyone is the same and everyone shares.” Granted, this was way back in 1991 when Walz hadn’t yet become Governor and was just a social studies teacher…wait, that makes it worse. Never mind.
Anyway, I figured it would be a good time to talk about communism since we have a VP candidate who thinks it’s neato.
communism
What the Left thinks it means – a socioeconomic system where everyone is treated equally, but one that has never been truly tried yet
What it really means – a socioeconomic system that only works on paper, as has been proven the times it’s been tried
At this point, I have to bring up communism’s stoner cousin, socialism. They share a similar lineage in that they both believe the government is the ultimate provider of all that is good and right in the world. Hmmm…I would say that sounds like the Harris/Walz platform except for the fact they really don’t have one.
Where they part company is in the use of violence and threats to maintain power. Socialism isn’t necessarily violent by nature. They just want everyone to voluntarily share with others. It’s a lot more peaceful than people think it is.
Then, there’s communism. Violence and threats are the coin of the realm in communist countries (mainly because their actual currency is worth less than a plot in a Michael Bay movie). Any concept of thought outside of the party dogma is dangerous and must be considered the communist version of a heretic.
The best way I’ve come up with to describe the fundamental differences between communism and socialism is thus. Socialism is communism on pot. Communism is socialism on PCP. And if you know anything about what happens to people on PCP, you know the shit hits the fan in ways you would never think possible.
As we speak, there are Leftists starting to type, “But both of them are about sharing and equality! Why are you against that, you bigot?” The fact is neither socialism nor communism will get you to your desired utopia, thanks to a little thing the kids like to call reality. And, yes, I understand Leftists tend to have a restraining order requiring reality to stay at least 500 feet away from them at all times, but Leftists need to listen to this next part.
All people are created equal in the sense most of the time Dad had to park his pork submarine in Mom’s tuna cove, but beyond that we aren’t. We are born with traits and hindrances from the jump. In order for us be equal, we would have to deny these things exist. And we all know we can’t deny science, right Leftists? I mean aside from there being two genders and such…
Since God, Nature, C’thulu, or whomever you want to blame didn’t make us equal, some dipshits thought it would be a great idea for Man to force equality. And those dipshits created socialism, which begat communism. And it didn’t work.
We Americans need only to go back to the time of the Pilgrims to see how the ideas behind communism and socialism fail in a spectacular way. Yet, Leftists keep thinking if they just try it again, it will work or else it wasn’t “real” communism/socialism. But, the thing is…it doesn’t work on a wide scale because human beings are more complex than what the aforementioned dipshits understand.
Here’s an example to illustrate this point. Let’s say you have two employees, Bob and Doug. Bob is diligent, goes above and beyond with every task put in front of him, and is a high performer. Doug…is none of these. He’s lazy, not very productive, and does the bare minimum at best to take care of things. Under most circumstances (unless Doug is related to the owner or has compromising photos of the owner), Doug would be out on his ass before he could say “Take off, hoser!”
Oh, I forgot to mention, Bob and Doug are Canadian.
Anyway, under communism, Bob would get punished for excelling and Doug would get rewarded for his sloth because the government would take from Bob to make sure Doug is taken care of. At some point, Bob is going to stop working so hard because there’s no upside to it. So, instead of having one superb employee and one subpar former employee having to give hand-jobs in a Tim Horton’s bathroom, you have two equally mediocre employees.
And somehow that’s supposed to work better than capitalism.
By the way, the Underpants Gnomes have better business sense than people who think communism could still work.
And if you think the Bob and Doug example was bad, just consider what kinds of products such mediocrity cranks out. Like Vice Presidential candidates.
And speaking of which, here’s what Tim Walz wrote about Chinese communism:
The doctor and the construction worker make the same. The Chinese government and the place they work for provide housing and 14 kg or about 30 pounds of rice per month. They get food and housing.
Of course, Walz wrote this from a decorated and air conditioned apartment on a salary double that of his Chinese teacher counterparts. I’m gonna go out on a limb here and say Walz had it way better than the average Chinese person. Unless he’s going with the George Orwell version of equality, that is.
By the way, Timmy, I think Orwell was kidding.
But I’m not sure Timmy is. It seems he has a penchant for communism and socialism, which explains the warm fuzzies he got from hanging out in China. It might also explain his recent statement, “One person’s socialism is another person’s neighborliness.” But there is a simpler explanation.
Tim Walz is dumber than Kamala Harris when it comes to economics, and Harris makes President Brick Tamland look like Milton Friedman. And all of them are smarter than Paul Krugman. No great feat, I grant you, but credit where credit is due.
Regardless of how you feel about Tim Walz and his socioeconomic hard-on for communism, the truth is communism is not a system that should be taken seriously. If anything, it should be dragged out of the flaming dumpster of history every once in a while to be mocked as a teachable moment for the children.
And for the dumbass politicians who think communism isn’t bullshit.
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
With President Brick Tamland announcing he was not limping…I mean running for reelection, the eyes of the world turned to Vice President Kamala Harris as the heiress apparent. And that means we get to do a deep dive into her accomplishments so far.
Fortunately for us, that deep dive doesn’t take that long since she’s accomplished what other Vice Presidents before her did: Jack Shit, and Jack left town.
But one role she had was Border Czar. Or not, depending on who you ask. In true Tamland fashion, she was put in charge of looking into the reason why so many illegal immigrants are coming here. (Spoiler Alert: it’s because we have the best free shit in the world.) And in true Harris fashion, she visited El Paso and called it a day. But she hadn’t been to Europe, either, so it’s totes cool, guys!
While the Left tries to figure out what excuse to use to try to cover up Harris’s ineptitude on the border, it gives us a chance to wade into the wonderful world of what a Border Czar even is.
Border Czar
What the Left thinks it means – a title bestowed upon Vice President Harris by evil Republicans to try to connect her to the border crisis (which doesn’t exist, by the way)
What it really means – a meaningless title given to a meaningless figurehead
The concept of policy czars has been around for a while. The first ones came about during the Franklin Delano Roosevelt Presidency to address certain aspects of World War II and the economy, but later expanded into areas like combating drug abuse, reading, and weatherizing. (And I wish I was kidding about those last two.)
Put bluntly, being a policy czar today is like being salutatorian of summer school: only a few people actually care about it and even fewer will remember it. And in the end nothing gets done, really.
Which means it’s a perfect gig for someone with a lot of time on his or her hands and who isn’t expected to succeed in any meaningful way. You know, like the Vice President.
It also means it shouldn’t be done just to put a body in a seat when it come to addressing a high profile issue like illegal immigration. Depending on which lie you want to believe, our southern border is either perfectly secure (but Republicans are totally to blame for record-breaking crossings) or less secure than an unlocked Ferrari in South Central LA. And for your eagle-eyed readers out there who click on the links, you’ll notice these statements come from two different members…of the same Administration. But you know who didn’t weigh in on the border situation?
The fucking Border Czar herself.
Now, I’m no policy wonk, but I would think one of the most important elements of being a Border Czar is presenting a consistent, fact-based message. Unfortunately for us, the Tamland Administration’s consistency is in denying the problem exists until it gets to a point where they have to do something to make it look like they’re doing something. Meanwhile, illegal immigration is still very much an issue, despite Harris’s brilliant message to some looking to enter the country illegally: do not come.
Well, Kams, they’re not listening. Or maybe they’re trying to figure out your message amidst the vomited word salads you frequently put out there as cogent statements.
Maybe that’s why the Left is trying to scrub the collective memories of the general public by denying she was the Border Czar. After all, Kamala Harris has to beat Donald Trump, even though she’s never won a national election by herself yet. The last time she tried to win the Presidency she pulled out of the race before the Iowa Caucuses after Tulsi Gabbard bitch-slapped her into oblivion.
It also means I got the same number of delegates Harris did and I didn’t even run.
It’s clear Harris’s role as Border Czar has been a dismal failure (and I’m being verrrrrrrrrrrrry generous here). This begs the question of why we need one in the first place, especially considering we already have one: the President. If you remember your civics homework (or in the case of Leftists if you’re hearing this for the first time since you blew off civics to protest), the Executive Branch is responsible for enforcing the laws of his country. That means the President and his staff are the Czars and they’re not doing a good job.
That means anybody who is called a Czar becomes a lightning rod to absorb any criticism for when they fuck up their one jobs. But, as with so many government jobs, you can’t be fired for being incompetent. If anything, it’s a career enhancer. (See the current President and Vice President for two examples.) Plus, you get a nice stipend and a government pension, and that much capital goes a long way to fix any hurt feefees.
But the immigration problem is still there. Pretty soon we’ll have to throw the concept of the Border Czar on top of the pile of other well-meaning, but poorly-executed government ideas, like the War on Drugs, the War on Poverty, and making the Socialist Socialite a Congresswoman. Yet, there isn’t really much of a will to do anything about the problem from the Czar on down because there’s too much to be gained by both sides of the issue. The Left use illegal immigration to help their candidates win and create a “humanitarian crisis” that only Big Daddy Government can fix. The Right use illegal immigration to create scary scenarios where all the jobs are taken, only violent criminals make it across, and no one but them can fix the problem.
But where the Right gets it right (see what I did there?) is in pointing out the national security aspect of illegal immigration. Open borders, such as the kind promoted by the Tamland Administration, create gaps in our security network. And with Leftist dipshits on record as not wanting to even look for illegal immigrants let alone deport them, those gaps are going to get wider and harder to close. Worse yet, we don’t have much of a strategy for dealing with the implications.
Certainly this is something a President (or a prospective President) should take seriously enough to do more than appoint some toadie to do nothing and get paid for doing it. The last guy who even attempted that got called all sorts of names, ironically by some of the people currently in charge of the failed border policy but are now trying to copy what Donald Trump did. See, President Tamland can’t help but plagiarize!
Ultimately, though, we don’t need a Border Czar in the same way we don’t need an extended warranty for a beater from Uncle Sleazy’s It Was Like That When We Got It Used Car Emporium where their motto is “No Refunds.” It’s a worthless position that should already be covered by the existing leadership structure.
Then again, this is the federal government we’re talking about here. Expecting leadership in Washington is like expecting the hooker to fall in love with you after you pay her. Not that I know anything about that, mind you…
Here We Go Again!
If there’s been one policy idea that President Brick Tamland has been trying to get off the ground, it’s student loan debt forgiveness. Even after the Supreme Court smacked it down, our boy Brick has continued to push for it. Recently, he rolled out new initiatives to help those with student loan debt to the tune of a measly $7.7 billion. In spite of the fact the Supreme Court said he doesn’t have the power to do it, as Nancy Pelosi noted.
But that’s not what this piece is about.
When announcing these new initiatives, Secretary of Education Miguel Cardona said the following:
We must continue to protect borrowers from predatory institutions—and work toward a higher education system that is affordable to students and taxpayers.
Hmmm…now, where have I heard the term “predatory” used before…oh, yeah, the mortgage bank crisis!
Without going into the gory details, I was in the mortgage industry when the shit hit the fan. Through government fuck-ups disguised as helping people, lenders skirting the law to make sales, house-flippers whose only motivation was to make a quick buck, and borrowers being dumber than a bag of hammers about Economics 101 for Dummies, the mortgage industry was in a world of hurt. Naturally, people started looking for any kind of help.
Enter Big Daddy Government! They would fix the problem by going after the easiest of targets: the lenders themselves. Now, I’m not saying all of the lenders were working above board and even some of the more reputable ones had hinky loan terms that you would need to be careful to read and understand before signing on the dotted line. But speaking from what I saw more often than not, the problems blamed solely on the banks were (or at least should have been) a shared responsibility.
That’s one of the reasons I didn’t like “The Big Short” as much as everyone else did. In an attempt to create an entertaining movie-going experience, it left out a LOT of shady shit and utter incompetence. And that’s just within the federal government!
Anyway, the point is people looked to the government to help bring those predatory lenders to heel, and the government responded by…expanding itself. Up until the mortgage crisis, mortgage complaints fell under the umbrella of the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency. But those DC galaxy-brain thinkers didn’t think it was enough to make every mortgage bank jump through the OCC’s hoops, so they created a new agency, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, thanks in part to Chief Running Mouth, Elizabeth Warren.
And having dealt with them on numerous occasions, we were better off with just the OCC. Of course, we would be even better off with monkeys and typewriters, but that’s neither here nor there.
At this point, you might be wondering what in the Wide World of Fuck this has to do with student loan debt. It’s all in the approach. Since Leftists had success in convincing people the mortgage loans they signed their names to were all a part of the evil cabal of Big Banking, they’re trying the same thing with student loan debt. They’re even using the same language. On the plus side, it’s one of the rare times Leftists actually recycle, so yay, I guess.
If the Social Media Platform Known As Twitter is any indication, this tactic is working again. Young adults who know there are 90 gajillion genders but think 2 + 2 equals potato (hat tip to Simon Miller for that turn of a phrase, by the way) are being allowed to straddle the line between being competence and incompetence simultaneously. You know, just like Kamala Harris. And invariably, they’re going to get what they want because Leftists are never ones to let a crisis (especially one of their own creation) go to waste.
Others have astutely pointed out President Tamland’s student loan forgiveness is a big gift to the banks who lent the money in the first place, which it most certainly is. And others have also pointed out the loan isn’t forgiven so much as being pushed onto other people. This is also correct. But what I don’t see too many people talking about is what the next step could be.
And having seen this shit play out before, I think I have a pretty good idea of what’s next.
I see this playing out in one of two ways. First, some DC douchebag with more vices than brains may try to put student loan debt under the umbrella of the CFPB. In a demented kind of way, this makes sense. After all, the CFPB is charged with holding big banks accountable for predatory loan practices (even if they don’t understand regular loan practices), so it’s not that much of a leap to suggest they devote a portion of their efforts on student loans.
Second, and the one I think is more likely, some DC douchebag is going to suggest the creation of a brand new federal agency like the CFPB, but with a focus on student loan practices. Remember, one of my Immutable Laws of Life is a bureaucracy’s sole purpose is to find ways to make itself more expansive and incapable of being removed. So, what’s to say a CFPB II: Electric Boogaloo is out of the question?
I mean, aside from me, of course.
In either case, expect the federal government to get more involved with fucking up student loans in the near future. Just try to act surprised when it happens.
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
Recently, the Boy Scouts of America announced it would change its name to Scouting America effective February 2025. Although there are reasons and speculation as to why, one of the main reasons came from the President and CEO Roger Krone. In an attempt to get with the times and promote inclusion, Krone said the name change would allow Scouts to “bring their authentic self” to the organization.
Because as we all know, the Boy Scouts have a merit badge for being inauthentic.
Although the idea of increasing membership to the Boy Scouts isn’t a bad idea, the Leftist underpinnings of the concept of an authentic self making their way into the organization is. More after the break.
authentic self
What the Left thinks it means – who you really are outside of the constraints the world puts on you
What it really means – enabling self-delusion
There was a concept in the 70s where people had to “find themselves,” which often meant adults would leave their families to chase their dreams (i.e. act irresponsibly without fear of familial interference). This lead to a lot of broken homes, hard feelings, and an entire generation of kids who had to grow up without one of their parents. (Shout out to my fellow Gen Xers!)
Like bell bottoms, disco, and only 3 channels on TV, finding ourselves fell out of favor. And like two out of the three of these things, finding ourselves came back. Only this time, finding ourselves took on a whole new dimension. No longer were we restricted to what the kids like to call reality. We could find ourselves in whatever the fuck we wanted! And if we tried to point out you can’t really be a character from your favorite cartoon because it’s a fucking cartoon, well we’re just preventing you from being your authentic self.
And now you know why I’m not a fan of recycling, especially recycling really bad ideas.
At the heart of the concept of an authentic self is a lie people tell themselves. There are some things we can’t change through science, ideology, or self-delusion. For example, if you’re a 6’6″ 390 pound lineman from the Chicago Bears, you’re bound to know what it’s like not to reach the Super Bowl. But along with that, you are a tall, heavy man. You cannot will your way into becoming a 6 inch fairy named SparklyAss. The best you can do is pretend.
And that’s the operative word, Mr. Spock: pretend. As in not real. As in make believe. As in the approval numbers for President Brick Tamland.
So many of the “authentic self” crowd have bought into the lie for any number of reasons. One of the most prevalent ones I think is the need for attention. Thanks to the great enabler that is social media, narcissism is becoming a major issue in our society. And what better way to make yourself the center of attention than to insist the world cater to your whims? If you don’t like the way your life is, create a better one and make the world adopt it, even as they adopt their own. Before you know it, we had to come up with new pronouns, more genders than Baskin Robbins has flavors, and an increasing level of self-importance and entitlement.
And you don’t even have to be someone who promotes the concept of an authentic self. Just go to YouTube and look up arrest videos with entitled people. But that’s a flaming dumpster fire for another time.
The point is it’s impossible to have an authentic self if you have to lie to make it authentic. But societal pressures make that kind of lying acceptable. After all, if you’re not hurting anyone, it should be okay, right?
Wellllll…not so much.
The problem with narcissism is it’s never sated. The minute your star doesn’t shine as brightly as someone else’s, your world goes into freefall. And I’m not talking major incidents like a loved one dying, an accident with injuries, or a Madonna concert. I’m talking shit as minor as…getting your order wrong at Starbucks.
Apparently, a lot of people’s authentic selves are whiny bitches.
More to the point, though, is self-delusion and narcissism aren’t healthy traits. Granted, today’s version of health includes people so fat their shadows have triple chins, so healthy is a relative term. However, there are psychological aspects to both that can be long term and hard to overcome. The problem is people don’t want to overcome it. Ego is like crack, except it doesn’t show up on a drug screen. And thank God for that or I would be…in no trouble whatsoever. In fact, let’s never speak of the McDonalds interview where I asked the hiring manager when I could start slinging kangaroo burgers.
Meanwhile back at the point I was making, ego is a powerful drug that is just as habit-forming as crack. Although you can have a little ego without going all Charlie Sheen imitating Keith Richards, it’s important to keep a level head on your shoulders. A little ego boost can make your head swell pretty quickly. Then, before you know it, you’ll be looking for any excuse to satisfy your jones for attention.
And then you’ll look more and more like an asshole.
Some of the “authentic selves” advocates have reached peak assholery, but some just want to add a little spice to their lives. If you fall into the latter category, I have a question and I don’t want you to take this the wrong way. Have you considered getting a hobby? You know, something that will get you outside the house and allows you to meet actual people? Sure, you run the risk of having your personal fantasy disrupted by reality, but it’s worth it in the long run. Connecting with people, learning more about them and they about you, sharing genuine human contact, that shit’s good for you! And you can find the real you, not the “authentic self” you wish you could be.
The problem with that, to Leftists, is it empowers people to accept reality. A lot of Leftist rhetoric involves stretching the truth like Reed Richards in yoga pants, so anything that allows people to opt out of their reality is bad for them. So, they agree with everything and anything that will get suckers…I mean voters to agree with them.
Including the lineman who wants to be called SparklyAss.
And that’s all the “authentic self” crowd needs to keep their delusions alive. These people don’t need validation; they need emotional fulfillment in the real world. They need someone to say “I like you for you, not for who you wish to be.” Or at the very least they need someone to say “As great as your fantasy world is, the real world has much better graphics.”
Granted, some people will be harder to reach with this message than others. Just work on the ones you can and let the more extreme cases go, at least until they do something to harm themselves and others. Then, no amount of “authentic self” talk will save them from an authentic ass-whuppin.
Although I’ve never been a member of the Boy Scouts, I grew up respecting their basic tenets as a foundation for a good productive life. I want every child to experience scouting in one form or another, but doing it by violating the Boy Scouts’ basic principles isn’t the way to do it. That’s selling out in the hopes it attracts more potential Scouts. And it’s not going to work because a) it will turn off people who would have sent their boys to the Boy Scouts before the more inclusive version took over, and b) it will turn off secular parents who might be attracted to the inclusion, but turned off by the religious overtones.
Quite the knot you’ve tied there, Boy Scouts. Is there a merit badge for fucking shit up so badly it ruins your brand in perpetuity? If not, you might want to make one. Just put a picture of Dylan Mulvaney holding a Bud Light on it and, boom, you’re done!
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
With springtime finally here (check local listings for the springtime in your area), college campuses (or would that be campusi?) are abuzz with activity. Sure, some are preparing for finals, dissertations, and summer internships, but many are taking the nice weather to…protest a war half a world away.
Yes, from sea to shining sea, student activists are rising up to show support to Palestine in its war against those evil mean nasty no-good Israelis. And Leftists are eating it up, or at least they’re trying to have it catered because “humanitarian aid” or some such bullshit. The Leftists of yesterday are enjoying the Leftists of today as the latter group does its best to LARP as the former.
But one of these things is not like the other. And none of these things belong on a college campus. Let’s delve into the wonderful world of protests.
protests
What the Left thinks it means – demonstrations designed to raise awareness and initiate desired social change
What it really means – college students being assholes
The right to protest is solidified in the First Amendment in a few different ways, namely the right to free speech, the right to peaceably assemble, and the right to redress grievances. All of these aren’t bad in and of themselves. After all, if I didn’t have a First Amendment right, I wouldn’t be able to provide you with at least semi-intelligent blog posts on a regular basis.
You can stop typing your letters to have the First Amendment repealed, thank you very much.
Anyway, protests are a good test of how strong our commitment to the First Amendment is. At their core, they’re designed to challenge our way of thinking and consider an alternative. At least, that was before it became fashionable to start taking over campus buildings in the name of whatever cause is hip at the time. During the 60s and early 70s, it was America’s involvement in Vietnam. During my college years, it was America’s involvement in Iraq during Operation Desert Shield/Operation Desert Storm. At the turn of the 21st Century, it was America’s involvement in Iraq and other Middle Eastern countries following 9/11. And in each one of these, there is an argument to be made about the protesters being on the right side of the issue. Granted, some arguments are dumber than others, but you get the idea.
The current crop of protesters, though…I’m just not feeling it. The best way I can describe it is college students are upset Israel is taking military action against people who killed a bunch of people and kidnapped others. Oh, and America and different colleges and universities across the country support Israel and/or take money from them. Obviously, this must be addressed! After all, we don’t want Israel to think they can actually defend themselves against people who want Jews exterminated, right?
This notion stems from the Left’s love of the underdogs, or at least politically expedient underdogs. You don’t see Leftists taking over campus buildings to protest the lack of white members of the Congressional Black Caucus, but you will see them expressing unwavering support for Palestinians, Ukrainians, and anyone else who is trying to fight the good fight against a bigger, more powerful enemy.
Oh, and just so happens to fit into a neat Leftist narrative. Palestinians are dying by the gajillions, guys! And those poor Ukrainians are having to fight a war with only toothpicks, some half-used bottles of Elmer’s Glue, and the occasional rubber band! It’s only moral to show their support for these brave fighters who only want a better life for themselves.
And, you know, kill enough of the enemy so they can take stuff.
So, to show their solidarity with the people actually doing the fighting, college students are…staying as far away from the front lines as possible and creating their own mini versions of the CHAZ/CHOP in Portland. But instead of being able to sustain themselves, these brave moral souls are making demands for everything from food to banana-free zones to building materials.
That’s right, kids. They’re holding private property hostage.
And to no one’s surprise, college and university administrators let it go until there’s enough pressure on them to do something. And do something they did! Some cancelled the rest of the semester. Some decided to go virtual for the rest of the semester. And a few grew some balls and brought in law enforcement to take down the encampments or suspended students involved in the protests.
It’s clear to me who the masterminds behind the current movement are: fucking idiots.
Seriously, it’s been bandied about that your fiend…I mean friend and mine, Uncle George Soros, is behind the current crop of campus uprisings. Of course, fact checkers have already tried to debunk it, so that tells me he’s definitely involved at some level. Maybe not directly, but his talon-like fingers are in there somehow because, well, he’s George Fucking Soros!
To be fair to the fact checkers, there are layers upon layers upon layers to the way Uncle George funds Leftist sinkholes…I mean projects. But in most cases, the money gets wasted because he’s relying on people who are fucking idiots to do his bidding.
Like…the student protesters! See! It all connects!
While the previously aforementioned protests tended to be more on the peaceful (and less destructive) side, the current group of protesters have been taught in the ways of BLM and Antifa, which sets up an interesting parallel with a couple of figures from the 60s protests, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X. At the start of the civil rights movement of the time, the two figures took diametrically opposite stances on how to advance the cause. King sought peaceful non-compliance, while Malcolm X sought more direct action, up to and including violence. Today’s protesters seem much more aligned with the Malcolm X approach of “by any means necessary” and are more than willing to shed blood to bring about change.
Not their blood, mind you. That would be insane! Now, someone else’s blood, that’s perfectly fine to fuck with.
The problem with this approach, however, comes in the form of criminal activities. At the very least, any protester who takes over a campus building and stays there beyond a reasonable request to vacate is guilty of trespassing. Not a serious crime, but a crime nonetheless. Then, there’s destruction of public property, graffiti, discrimination against pro-Israeli students through the use of wristbands, terroristic threats, and many other possible crimes that, if prosecuted, would land more than a few of the protesters in the Big House for a long time.
Therein lies the question: will they be prosecuted? Given how Leftists enjoy letting criminals run free, there’s a good chance most of them will get off with a slap on the wrist and a mark on their permanent record, which by now has been converted to a downloadable file on iTunes. And while a whiff of a criminal record might be enough to make potential employers run away from these idiots, there are some who are willing to hire them.
Yeah. Ask Bud Light and Planet Fitness how capitulating to the Left worked for them. Spoiler Alert: it tanked their companies so much Michael Dukakis was seen riding in them.
It’s the disregard for the law that separates the previous protests from the current crop. Sure, you had some criminal activity with some of the earlier protests I mentioned, but not nearly to the levels we’re currently seeing. And a lot less whining. It’s hard to be seen as a true revolutionary when you’re begging the educational entity you’re protesting for food so you can continue to protest the same educational entity.
Kinda makes you reconsider forgiving college debt, doesn’t it?
Regardless of where you stand on the war in Gaza, the fact remains the protesters are their own worst enemies, but they’re also doubling as President Brick Tamland’s worst enemies if MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough is any indication. More importantly, though, these protests show how far the Left has fallen as an engine for change. For all the positive press they’re getting from Leftists in the media, the needle isn’t moving in Palestine’s favor. If anything, they’re turning off more people than they’re gaining because they’re going about it the wrong way and looking like assholes in the process. Try getting people who are barely making ends meet to get on your side by blocking roadways with stupid marches which prevent them from going to or coming from work.
And even with the backdrop of academia, it’s hard for me to not laugh at the sheer absurdity of the protests themselves. I mean, will a Palestinian child be saved if Hippie McBonghit holes up in one of the administration buildings? Nope! Will there be a ceasefire if more students threaten Jewish students to the point they can’t even attend class without being accosted? No. Will the Palestinians be able to get a foothold in Gaza if the University of Southern Dumbfuckistan decides to divest itself from any Israeli sources of income? Oooh, sor-ray.
No matter what they do, the protesters are fighting a battle so delusional and futile Don Quixote is telling them to knock it off. But those of us outside the Leftist bubble have time on our side. The recent crop of protesters from Occupy Wall Street to the current dipshits aren’t ready for shit to go sideways. Once the current semester ends and there are fewer people to annoy, what will they do? They’re attention whores, and they will be deprived of the one thing they need more than anything: people paying attention to them. If these protests go further into summer (which I honestly doubt), they will have to deal with summer weather conditions, including heat, humidity, thunderstorms, tornadoes, and so on. Hell, a lot of the BLM protests broke up when the temperature dropped. And these marshmallow warriors don’t appear to be any different.
But I, for one, hope they prove me wrong. After all, it’s hard to find good comedy these days.
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
Lately there have been quite a few stories about people taking up residence in a property they don’t own, a practice known as “squatting.” And it’s not just catching on here, but in England as well. Yes, Chef Gordon Ramsay had to deal with squatters in one of his pubs (and I’ll bet there was a lot of profanity used in the process).
So, why the sudden interest in squatting? I’m glad you asked…or I asked…either way I’m glad the question was asked. Otherwise, this was going to be a really short Lexicon entry. It’s easy to blame it on President Brick Tamland’s economic policies being so shitty it puts the toilets at Chipotle to shame, but there’s a bit more to it.
And that means I get to talk about it.
squatting
What the Left thinks it means – people taking over properties for necessity
What it really means – people deciding to say “fuck property rights because reasons”
The history of squatting is long and distinguished. And by distinguished, I mean absolutely fucking nuts. Long story short, people have taking up residence in other people’s homes for centuries and there have been various ways to deal with them. Usually, these methods involve violence, but then lawyers and politicians got involved, so things had to change.
Hence, the creation of squatter’s rights. Yes, the same geniuses who couldn’t find their ways out of a non-existent paper bag decided people who openly break the law needed rights that would prevent them from being prosecuted for…breaking the fucking law. Every state has its own set of laws/guidelines/mere suggestions on squatting, but the result is the same: people taking something that doesn’t belong to them and not compensating the owner in any way.
Hmmmm…sounds like theft to me, kids!
Unfortunately, not everyone agrees. Squatting is rampant in Georgia, Texas, and Florida, and the laws (until recently) have put the onus on the property owners to jump through bureaucratic and legal hoops to get squatters to leave. And when you consider the squatters are stealing income from the property owners by not paying rent, that puts quite a burden on someone who is just trying to abide by the law.
Hmmmm…sounds like gun control laws, kids!
More to the point, however, is a notion Leftists have tried to push in recent years, that being housing is a human right. That has opened the door for people to assert squatting rights to inhabit buildings. But we’re not talking run down apartment buildings in bad neighborhoods or buildings on the verge of being condemned here. It seems squatters want to live in nice places. And since these nice places are often owned by greedy landlords or companies, it’s clear the squatters have the clear moral authority to take over these properties and make them into…well, unsafe hovels to be honest.
That’s where political ideology comes into play. With law enforcement in different parts of the country being weaker than the plot of a Michael Bay movie, squatting has become one of those ho-hum crimes. You know, like robbery, purchasing a child for sexual purposes, and violence. (And that’s just in California!) And guess who’s been at the forefront of all of this?
Leftists. Every. Damn. Time.
But don’t you make any bad comments on Facebook or they’ll throw not just the book at you, but the entire fucking library!
Anyway, a lack of enforcement makes squatting that much easier because trying to evict them is considered a civil matter instead of a criminal one, so the police are less likely to help. (Need I remind the men and women in blue we’re dealing with property theft here, not just some squabble between people?) Throw in the probability of fraud in the form of non-enforceable contracts or even non-existent contracts, and squatting becomes more criminal in nature.
But since the victims of these crimes are property owners (who Leftists think can just give up some of their property to those less fortunate because compassion), the Left doesn’t see the problem. At least, not until they find their luxury homes overrun with Phish groupies whose only source of income is investing their belly button lint in the NFT market.
For those of you unfamiliar, NFT stands for Nobody’s Fucking Trading.
Through this class warfare, the Left is able to perpetuate the idea of righteous takeover of other people’s properties under the notion of a right to housing. However, there’s a flaw in that thinking because of the nature of rights as compared to entitlements, which the “right” to housing is closer to being. A right is something you already have, like the right to free speech, gun ownership, and voting. You simply need to exercise it.
On the other hand, an entitlement is something you’re owed for one reason or another, like a pension or Social Security. With entitlements, there is a debt to be paid or a wrong to be righted. With housing, there is no real debt, wrong, or other obligation that can be addressed by a property owner giving up some or all of his/her property.
Hence, the Left pushing for people to feel entitled to other people’s shit, but shrouding it in the notion of a right. Most Americans take rights pretty seriously. Not as seriously as anything Taylor Swift is doing these days, mind you, but it’s still up there. By framing housing as a right, it cranks the level of seriousness to 11, and we’re more likely to treat it like a right.
Which is just what the Left wants.
After all, the Left believes government is the source of all good in the world, the ultimate arbiter of right and wrong, and the only way to achieve justice. If enough people believe housing is a right, there’s a good chance someone’s going to ask that all important question, “Where are my car keys?” Oh, and the other question, “Why isn’t our government doing anything about this?” Then, just like Oprah with a new scam to get wine moms to buy stupid shit with her name on it, government swoops in to save the day!
Only, the exact opposite happens.
Where things get really messy is when you consider the impact on contract law. Whenever there’s a transfer of property of any kind, there’s going to be a written agreement between/among the parties involved. And, yes my Leftist friends, this is a contract, and it can be legally enforced. When Leftists decide squatting is okay, they’re also saying, “We don’t give a fuck about that contract you have!” And as we’ve seen with other ventures (can you say “Obamacare”?), as long as the Left thinks they can do something better, they’re going to do it, whether you’re involved or not. After all, they’re smarter than the rest of us. Just ask them!
Yet, these same Leftists can’t figure out how this idea can backfire on them, or when it actually has. Remember the fuss Leftists made about Ron DeSantis and Greg Abbott sending illegal immigrants to “sanctuary cities”? If you think about it (and I have because I have a life that makes Boo Radley look like a bon vivant), the same approach can be applied to squatters. From what I’ve heard, Martha’s Vineyard has plenty of space and people willing to help! And if anyone asks, say you self-identify as an illegal immigrant!
But if we want a more realistic, yet less humorous solution, I have one: make squatting a criminal offense, like Ron DeSantis did. I’m sure Leftists are going to fight this in court because, well, that’s what they do whenever someone passes a law to unfuck a situation they created, but it will be interesting to see how the Left’s lawyers are going to argue theft, fraud, and property destruction are civil matters. Have your popcorn ready for those arguments, kids!
In the meantime, property owners need to keep up on what’s going on at their properties and follow the rules so the government knows who owns a property. Granted, this won’t stop squatters and their Leftist enablers from trying to pull a fast one, but it will make it a lot harder for them to convince the government and police they have a valid claim to the property. Make it as tough on them as they would make it on you if you had a squatter.
And, at least for now, stop short of booby trapping the property. Fences make good neighbors, but shrapnel wounds…not so much.
Party of Science, My Ass!
It wasn’t that long ago that politics and science were kept apart like men’s and women’s prisons. That was until Leftists decided to mix the two for the purposes of ideological advancement.
It started with global warming…ummm climate change…uhhhh climate catastrophes…or whatever the fuck they want to call it this minute. The point is climate science met someone who was willing to bring it into the limelight, but only after it became politics’ bitch. Enter Al “More Boring Than the Color Beige” Gore, a know-nothing know-it-all whose academic accomplishments were more underwhelming than my dating life. Prior to meeting my wife, of course!
Well, looks like I’m spending another night on the couch.
Anyway, Gore brought climate change into the forefront of American consciousness due in part to his book Earth in the Balance. Since I care about you and don’t want to bore you with a lengthy analysis, let me give you a summary.
Global Warming bad. Government good.
Here’s how bad it was. I had essentially a high school level knowledge of science and I was poking holes in ManBearPig’s arguments. But since he sounded like he knew what he was talking about, people believed him. And they still do even though he’s neck-and-neck with Paul Krugman on the idiot who can be the most wrong in modern American history.
But since the advent of the Internet, which Gore took credit for taking the initiative in creating it, surely we’ve become more scientifically literate, right? Not so much. And it’s usually the Left who is advancing the most unscientific bullshit. Here’s a sampling of “the Party of Science” and their greatest shits…I mean hits.
– Trans women can get periods.
– Trans women can get pregnant.
– The COVID-19 vaccine stops the virus.
– Climate change caused the recent eclipse.
– Climate change affects earthquakes.
– Guam could capsize.
– The moon is mostly made of gases.
– There are more than two genders.
– Math is racist.
– Science is racist.
– Physics is racist.
– Trans women athletes have no advantage over biological women.
– Gender-affirming care is health care.
– Abortion is health care.
– Children can choose their gender.
– Gun violence is a health care issue.
– Conservatives are dumber than liberals/Leftists.
I could go on, but you get the idea. Leftists are quick to believe science is on their side…except when it isn’t. When the science proves Leftists are full of shit, Leftists pull out all sorts of excuses. The findings weren’t peer-reviewed. The study was founded by [insert name of Big Something-Or-Other]. Nobody should take these scientists seriously because they defy the established science.
And when the Left can’t use those excuses, they blackball the scientists and memory-hole their findings so no one else can know the truth.
As a fan of science, I’m disgusted by how Leftists have abused science to advance political ends. It’s gotten to the point Leftists have turned what should be an apolitical advancement of knowledge into a cult. And, really, that’s what the Left has done. Just look at this Anthony Fauci devotional candle. That kind of shit doesn’t come from a place of science. It only comes from a place of religious fervor.
And it’s not like Leftists raised incompetent or dishonest people to god-like status in recent history. I mean, aside from Robert Mueller. And Jack Smith. And Fani Willis. And Letitia James. And Adam Schiff. And Nancy Pelosi. And Barack Obama. And Michelle Obama.
On second thought, maybe they do.
By deifying science, Leftists have hindered real science by making it harder for people to accept what they’ve been told from the people Leftists say we need to trust without question. Science works best when that doubt is undercut by the actual process, a little thing the kids like to call the scientific method. As we’ve seen with climate “science” since ManBearPig’s time, the Left has flipped the script. Instead of letting the process confirm or reject the hypothesis, they’ve made it fine to start with the conclusion and work backwards so the science seems to support the conclusion.
But the thing about pseudoscience is it always gets exposed by the sunlight of actual science. All the shit the “Party of Science” told us about COVID-19 has all but been discredited to the point they’re asking for amnesty from their lies. After all, science changes over time, so we should forgive and forget, right?
Nope. Not when you’ve made science your bitch (and not in a good way).
Extremist Makeover: Feminism Edition
Since the 1970s, women have been striving to be seen as equals to men and have used feminism as a conduit for change. During the past 50 years or so, we’ve seen feminism take a more prominent role in our discourse. Then, within the past 5 years, feminism as we knew it has gone quieter than Hunter Biden during a drug bust at a crack house.
Turns out feminism has been replaced by a new ism, transgenderism. Even the National Organization for Women has bent the knee to its new transgender masters…or would it be mistresses? Either way, feminism has taken a bit of a beating recently, so I’m here to help. We need to make over feminism so it can stay afloat long enough for people to come to their senses.
And failing that, at least to recognize the irony of biological men telling biological women what womanhood is and women just accepting it.
The first thing we need to address is the elephant in the room: feminism has been ruined by feminists. One of my Immutable Truths of Life is “A cause’s worst enemy is the members of the cause itself.” And this is no truer than with feminism. What started out as women asking to be treated the same as men evolved into women demanding to be treated better than men. Yes, they want to both be seen as highly competent and strong individuals, but don’t want to give up the perks of being seen as the “weaker sex.”
And that’s why transgender women want to dictate what a woman is. To them, being a woman is like playing a video game on Easy Mode. They want all the perks of womanhood without having to be one. But it takes more than a dress and makeup to be a woman, and that’s exactly what feminists need to do to reclaim womanhood for those who were born women.
Don’t worry about being called a “bad ally,” either. The fact is trans women like Lia Thomas and Dylan Mulvaney aren’t allies to feminism. If anything, they want to replace women while simultaneously mocking them. As of this writing, Thomas still has her…twigs and berries, if you know what I mean, so she’s not even trying to pass as a woman. She’s still just a long-haired man who says she’s trans so she can dominate swimming.
Because that’s what employers are looking for these days: athletic prowess.
And Mulvaney…well, let’s just say she’s on the other side of the equation by playing up the “women are bimbos” trope.
Some allies they are, amirite?
Once womanhood is reclaimed from the Left, the next step is going to be a bit easier. One of the biggest complaints about feminists in recent years is how annoying and judgmental they’ve become if a woman doesn’t do what the feminist ideology of the microsecond demands. The thing is feminism isn’t one-size-fits-all. There are stay-at-home mothers who are just as strident as the rainbow haired harpy screaming about abortion rights, and it’s time the feminist movement recognizes that. The goal should be female empowerment, not female subjugation under a single banner.
And third, dump the “third wave” feminists. These nozzleheads are the ones who have not only made feminism unpopular, but lead the movement to kowtow before our new trans masters…errr, mistresses. They’re the feminist version of the Karen, but without the charm and warmth. And they will not be denied in their quest to turn feminism into their personal sword and shield. The movement as a whole would be better off without them. Let them go off and create their own version of feminism, and you’ll see your membership numbers soar.
Or at least they won’t be embarrassed to call themselves feminists.